UNDP Project Document
Government of Nigeria
Lead Agency: Federal Ministry of Environment
Additional partners: Ministry of Niger Delta; Niger Delta Development Commission Ministry of
Petroleum Resources; Oil Production Trade Sector, Lagos Chamber of Commerce
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)
Global Environment Facility (GEF)
The GEF’s Strategic Programme for West Africa (SPWA) – Sub-component Biodiversity
UNDP GEF PIMS no.: 2047
GEFSEC Project ID: 4090
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
Brief description
This project’s goal is to contribute to the conservation and sustainable use of globally significant biological diversity in the
Niger Delta. The project objective is “to mainstream biodiversity management priorities into the Niger Delta oil and gas (O&G)
sector development policies and operations.” The project’s three main outcomes designed to achieve this objective are: 1)
Stakeholders strengthen the governance framework of law, policy, and institutional capacity to enable the mainstreaming of
biodiversity management into the O&G sector in the Niger Delta; 2) Government, the O&G industry and local communities
adopt and pilot new biodiversity action planning tools for proactive biodiversity mainstreaming in the Niger Delta; 3)
Stakeholders support long-term biodiversity management and the use of these new tools in the Niger Delta by capitalizing the
Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust with a collaborative engagement mechanism for local communities, O&G companies and
Government at its core. Each of the three outcomes of this project reflects the project’s (and UNDP’s) focus on strengthening
the governance of biodiversity in the Niger Delta. By mainstreaming biodiversity into the O&G sector of the Niger Delta, the
project is strengthening the governance of those resources. The geographic focus of the project is on the four core Nigerian
States within the Niger Delta (Akwa Ibom, Bayelsa, Delta, and Rivers States), which combined encompass an area of 46,420
km2 (the ‘indirect landscape mainstreaming target’). The physical footprint of the O&G company assets within this area is
admitted by the industry to be 600 km2, which is considered the project’s initial ‘direct landscape mainstreaming target’ The
project will bring improved biodiversity management to these areas indirectly and directly, respectively, as measured by
improved state of globally significant species and ecosystems, legal and policy frameworks that incorporate biodiversity
objectives, and O&G companies adopting best practice for biodiversity actions. A key result will be the establishment of a
long-term funding mechanism for mainstreaming biodiversity into the O&G sector, called the Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
1
Table of Contents
SECTION I: Elaboration of the Narrative ....................................................................................................... 7
PART I: Situation Analysis ........................................................................................................................... 7
Context and global significance ........................................................................................................... 7
Background and Environmental context ................................................................................................. 7
Socio-Economic Context....................................................................................................................... 12
Institutional context ............................................................................................................................... 16
Law and policy context ......................................................................................................................... 25
Threats, Root causes and Impacts ...................................................................................................... 31
Pollution ................................................................................................................................................ 32
Habitat degradation and land-use change. ............................................................................................. 36
Over-harvesting of natural resources. ................................................................................................... 38
Invasive alien species. ........................................................................................................................... 39
Long-term solution and barriers to achieving the solution ................................................................. 39
Baseline analysis ................................................................................................................................ 45
PART II: Strategy ........................................................................................................................................ 52
Project Rationale and Policy Conformity ........................................................................................... 52
Fit with the GEF Focal Area Strategy and Strategic Programme.......................................................... 52
Rationale and summary of GEF Alternative ......................................................................................... 53
Project Goal, Objective, Outcomes and Outputs/activities ................................................................ 54
Outcome 1 ............................................................................................................................................. 54
Outcome 2 ............................................................................................................................................. 62
Outcome 3 ............................................................................................................................................. 71
Risks and Assumptions ...................................................................................................................... 79
Incremental reasoning and expected global, national and local benefits ........................................... 83
Reasoning and Summary of Benefits .................................................................................................... 83
System’s boundary ................................................................................................................................ 84
Incremental Cost Analysis .................................................................................................................... 85
Cost-effectiveness .............................................................................................................................. 87
Project consistency with national priorities/plans .............................................................................. 89
Country Ownership: Country Eligibility and Country Drivenness .................................................... 90
Sustainability and Replicability ......................................................................................................... 90
PART III: Management Arrangements ..................................................................................................... 92
Implementation Arrangements ........................................................................................................... 92
Project Oversight ................................................................................................................................ 93
Project Management ........................................................................................................................... 94
PART IV: Monitoring and Evaluation Plan and Budget ......................................................................... 95
Monitoring and reporting ................................................................................................................... 95
Inception Phase ..................................................................................................................................... 95
Quarterly ............................................................................................................................................... 96
Annually ................................................................................................................................................ 96
Periodic Monitoring through site visits ................................................................................................. 97
Mid-term of project cycle ...................................................................................................................... 97
End of Project........................................................................................................................................ 97
Learning and knowledge sharing .......................................................................................................... 98
PART V: Legal Context ............................................................................................................................... 99
SECTION II: STRATEGIC RESULTS FRAMEWORK (SRF) AND GEF INCREMENT ................... 100
PART I: Strategic Results Framework, SRF (formerly GEF Logical Framework) Analysis ............. 100
Indicator framework as part of the SRF ........................................................................................... 100
SECTION III: Total Budget and Workplan ................................................................................................ 104
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
2
SECTION IV: Additional Information ......................................................................................................... 107
PART I: Other agreements ....................................................................................................................... 107
Co-financing Letters......................................................................................................................... 107
PART II: Terms of References for key project staff ............................................................................... 108
National Team Leader ...................................................................................................................... 108
Chief Technical Adviser on Mainstreaming (CTAM) ..................................................................... 109
Overview of Inputs from Technical Assistance Consultants ........................................................... 110
PART IV: Stakeholder Involvement Plan................................................................................................ 112
Project Annexes............................................................................................................................................... 114
Annex 1. Capacity Development Scorecard ............................................................................................. 114
Annex 2. Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust – Platform for Partnerships .................................................. 120
Annex 3. Maps ............................................................................................................................................ 121
Annex 4. Industry Assessment and Initial Engagement Plan ................................................................ 127
1. Industry Overview ........................................................................................................................ 128
2. Profile of Key Industry Players .................................................................................................... 132
3. Prospects for Effective Industry Engagement .............................................................................. 146
4. Industry Engagement Mechanisms .............................................................................................. 151
5. Capitalization Plan for the Trust Fund ......................................................................................... 156
6. Initial Industry Engagement Plan ................................................................................................. 157
Annex 5. Fauna of the Niger Delta: Additional Information ................................................................ 160
Mammals ............................................................................................................................................. 160
Birds .................................................................................................................................................... 161
Fish ...................................................................................................................................................... 162
Amphibians and Reptiles .................................................................................................................... 163
Annex 6. GEF4 SO2 Tracking Tool. ........................................................................................................ 164
I. Project General Information ........................................................................................................ 164
II. Project Landscape/Seascape Coverage ........................................................................................ 164
III. Management Practices Applied .................................................................................................. 167
IV. Market Transformation .............................................................................................................. 167
V. Policy and Regulatory frameworks ............................................................................................. 168
VI. Other Impacts ............................................................................................................................. 170
List of Tables, Figures, Matrices and Boxes
Table 1: Ecological Zones of the Niger Delta by State ......................................................................................... 8
Table 2: Socio-economic data for four Delta States. .......................................................................................... 12
Table 3: Summary of Capacity Assessments - FMoE, NESREA, NOSDRA..................................................... 17
Table 4: Stakeholder Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 21
Table 6: Federal and State budgetary allocations for biodiversity conservation related projects. ...................... 50
Table 7: Biodiversity related projects implemented by NGOs in the Niger Delta.............................................. 50
Table 8: Summary of the project’s contribution to focal area objectives and indicators .................................... 53
Table 9: Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust Anticipated Funding and Expenditures (estimates - millions $) ......... 77
Table 10: Elaboration of Risks ........................................................................................................................... 80
Table 11: Project Risks Assessment and Mitigation Measures .......................................................................... 81
Table 12. Incremental Cost Matrix ..................................................................................................................... 85
Table 13: Use Value of Niger Delta ecosystem based on benefit transfer approach .......................................... 88
Table 14: M&E Activities, Responsibilities, Budget and Time Frame .............................................................. 98
Table 15: Overview of Inputs from Technical Assistance Consultants ............................................................ 110
Table 16: Coordination and collaboration between project and related initiatives ........................................... 113
Figure 1: Ecological Zones of the Niger Delta ..................................................................................................... 7
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
3
Figure 2: Niger Delta Oil Infrastructure ............................................................................................................. 15
Figure 3: Flow chart of Nigeria’s EIA procedures ............................................................................................. 26
Figure 4: The three dimensions to mainstreaming biodiversity into the O&G sector in the Niger Delta. .......... 44
Figure 5: The Oil and Gas Project Life Cycle .................................................................................................... 59
Figure 6: The biodiversity damage mitigation hierarchy and optimal point for offsetting ................................. 65
Figure 7: Envisioned NDBT Management Structure .......................................................................................... 76
Matrix 1: Mainstream biodiversity criteria and objectives into the EIA process................................................ 57
Matrix 2: Mainstreaming of biodiversity into the new Petroleum Industry Bill ................................................. 59
Matrix 3: A biodiversity action matrix ............................................................................................................... 67
Box 1: “Inside the Fence” & “Outside the Fence”............................................................................................. 32
Box 2: Considerations on biodiversity offsets in the Niger Delta ...................................................................... 66
Box 3: Risk Assessment Guiding Matrix............................................................................................................ 81
Box 4: Global Biodiversity Significance of the Niger Delta .............................................................................. 84
Box 5: Summary TOR for the PPG Report ‘Industry Assessment and Initial Industry Engagement Plan’ ..... 127
Maps in Annex 3
Map 1: Core Niger Delta States
Map 2: Core Niger Delta Local Government Areas (LGA) and Communities
Map 3: Crude Oil Pipelines Network in the Niger Delta
Map 4: Nigeria Oil and Gas Concessions as of January 2010
Map 5: Areas of Conservation Priority in the Niger Delta
Map 6: Marine and Coastal Diversity in the Niger Delta
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
4
Acronyms
ADP
Agricultural Development Programme
BAP
Biodiversity Action Plan
BBOP
Business and Biodiversity Offsets Program
BDCP
Bioresources Development and Conservation Programme
bpd
Barrels per day
BSCF
Billion Standard Cubic Feet
DEA
Department of Environmental Assessment
DPR
Department of Petroleum Resources
EF
Ecological Fund
EGASPIN
Environmental Guidelines and Standards for the Petroleum Industry in Nigeria
EIA
Environmental Impact Assessment
EIS
Environmental Impact Statement
EITI
Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative
EMP
Environmental Management Plan
ERDI
Environmental Renewal and Development Initiative
FD
Forestry Department
FMoE
Federal Ministry of Environment, Housing and Urban Development
MND
Ministry of Niger Delta
GEF
Global Environment Facility
GGFR
Global Gas Flaring Reduction Partnership
GoN
Government of Nigeria
IBA
Important Bird Area
IBAT
Integrated Biodiversity Assessment Tool
IPIECA
International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association
LEEDS
Local Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy
LENF
Living Earth Nigeria Foundation
LGA
Local government areas
LGC
Local government council
MoPR
Ministry of Petroleum Resources
MoU
Memorandum of Understanding
NCF
Nigerian Conservation Foundation
NCEP
National Committee on Ecological Problems
NDDC
Niger Delta Development Commission
NDU
Niger Delta University, Yenagoa, Bayelsa State
NDWC
Niger Delta Wetlands Centre
NNPC
Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation
NAPIMS
National Petroleum Investment Management Services
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
5
NESREA
Nigerian Environmental Standards and Regulation Enforcement Agency
NEEDS
National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy
NOSDRA
National Oil Spill Disaster Response Agency
NPDC
Nigerian Petroleum Development Company
NTFP
Non-timber forest products
O&G
Oil and Gas
PIND
Foundation for Partnership Initiatives in the Niger Delta
PPG
Project Preparation Grant
PTDF
Petroleum Technology Development Fund
SEEDS
State Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy
SEP
Stakeholder Engagement Plan
SMoE
State Ministry of Environment
SPDC
Shell Petroleum Development Corporation
SPWA
Strategic Programme for West Africa (GEF)
UNDP
United Nations Development Programme
UNEP
United Nations Environment Programme
UNESCO
United Nations Education, Science, and Culture Organization
UST
Rivers State University of Science and Technology
UU
University of Uyo, Akwa Ibom State
WCMC
World Conservation Monitoring Center
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
6
SECTION I: ELABORATION OF THE NARRATIVE
PART I: Situation Analysis
CONTEXT AND GLOBAL SIGNIFICANCE
Background and Environmental context
1.
Nigeria is Africa’s most populous country and is one of the world’s leading oil producers
due to the vast oil and gas reserves in the Niger Delta. With much of its reserves of oil and gas
still untapped, the Niger Delta region of Nigeria produces 2.2 million barrels of oil per day. The
Niger River is the principal river of West Africa with a length of approximately 4,180 km and a
drainage basin encompassing 2,117,700 km2. Over millennia, the mighty Niger River created the
vast Niger Delta at its confluence with the Atlantic Ocean’s Guinea and Benguela Currents.
Figure 1: Ecological Zones of the Niger Delta
2.
For the purposes of this project, the Niger Delta is defined as the area of the four coastal
oil producing Niger Delta States: Akwa Ibom, Bayelsa, Delta, and Rivers. The total combined
area of these states is 46,420 km2. Nigeria’s Niger Delta is characterized by high biological
diversity, abundant natural resources, and extreme poverty. A survey of current knowledge on
the biological diversity of the Niger Delta reveals striking global significance across the full
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
7
range of biological diversity at the genetic, species and ecosystems levels. Biological diversity is
the variety of the world's plant and animal life (in this case, the Delta’s), including their genetic
diversity and the assemblages they form.
3.
Home to Global 200 Ecoregion # 155 (Niger Delta) and part of the Guinean Forests
Hotspot1, the Niger Delta harbors many locally and globally endangered species, and
approximately 60-80% of all plant and animal species found in Nigeria. The Delta’s unique
biogeographical attributes are responsible for the complex and rich milieu of habitats that
enabled the evolution of this biological diversity.
4.
The Niger Delta is one of the largest wetlands in the world and is Africa’s largest Delta.
Stretching approximately 240 km from Onitsha in the north to the outer barrier islands in the
south and 480 km, from the Benin River on the east to the Imo River on the West, the Niger
Delta encompasses a triangular area of approximately 46,420 km2. The Delta consists of three
main ecological zones (consolidated for simplicity’s sake from the seven shown in Figure 1): the
upper freshwater riverine floodplain, the lower tidal floodplain comprised of estuaries,
mangroves, and creeks; and the outer chain of barrier islands (a special dynamic and ephemeral
land formation/coastal vegetation type similar to the lowland rain forest). This outermost coastal
forest zone represents some of the last remaining pristine forest resources and centers of
endemism in Africa.
Table 1: Ecological Zones of the Niger Delta by State
Delta eco-region
States
States in the
Niger Delta
Akwa Ibom
Upper Floodplain
Forest
Lower floodplain
Mangroves
Barrier Islands
Size
km2
8,412
State
coverage km2
7,747.5
% of
state
92.12
State
coverage
546.8
% of
state
6.5
State
coverage
117.8
% of
state
1.4
Bayelsa
10,773
6485.3
60.2
3533.5
32.8
754.1
7
Delta
16,842
13,271.5
78.8
2,863.1
17
707.4
4.2
Rivers
10,393
7,89.9
7.6
3,367.3
32.4
6,235.8
60
46,420
28,294.2
Total
1,0310.7
7,815.1
5.
The Niger Delta is a vast, flat region. Rainfall is high—more than 2,500 mm per year—
and temperatures range from 18-33° C. Humidity levels are close to 100% throughout the year.
Upper floodplain forest or seasonally flooded forests grow on more than half of the Delta's
46,420 km2. Although forests dry up almost completely in the dry season, they are revitalized
regularly through annual flooding. The upper floodplain stretches for 168 kilometers from
beginning of the Delta upstream at Onitsha to where the inter-tidal region begins. The Niger
River splits into the Forcados and Nun Rivers in this region. The Nun River is regarded as the
direct continuation of the Niger, but some of the other important channels include (from west to
east) the Forcados, the Brass, the Sambreiro, and the Bonny. This ecoregion within the delta is
non-tidal and is characterized by a seasonally flooded forest mosaic of small lakes and broadleafed species such as Symphonia globulifera, raphia palm (Raphia vinifera), and the indigenous
oil palm (Elaeis guineensis). The palm species R.vinifera is particularly abundant along the
1
2
Myers, N. et. al. 2000. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403. 853-858.
Includes 1.7% of Akwa Ibom that is Savannah.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
8
creeks of the Niger Delta. The tree’s nut contains an bitter oil, which has the property of
stupefying fish. Freshwater biotopes within the non-tidal systems can be characterized as “black
water” and “white water” systems. Black water systems are rainfall-fed and colored a dark
brown by humic substances, suspended materials and plankton. White water systems receive
their water from the River Niger and are richer in minerals and oxygen, resulting in high
molluscan diversity such as snails and bivalves: Mutela, Etheria, Caelatura, Eupera, Lanistes,
Melania.
6.
The lower tidal floodplain encompasses over 20 large estuaries and 7,700 km2 of
mangrove forests, which is more than 70% of Nigeria’s estimated 10,000 km2 of mangrove
forests, Africa’s largest mangrove area and the world’s third largest. Nigerian mangroves are
comprised of six species in three families. These are: Rhizophoraceae (Rhizophora racemosa, R.
harrisonii and R. mangle), Avicenniaceae (Avicennia africana) and Combretaceae
(Laguncularia racemosa and Conocarpus erectus). Tidal effects are quite high in the mangrove
zone and reach amplitudes of 1-3 m. The mangrove zone runs roughly parallel to the coast and
reaches between 15-45 km inland. This deep belt of mangrove forest protects the freshwater
wetlands in the Inner Delta. The trees and roots provide rich habitats for a wide range of flora
and fauna, much of which is only just beginning to be understood. The Delta’s mangrove forests
are on the “Tentative List” of potential UNESCO World Heritage Sites. An estimated 60% of the
fish in the Gulf of Guinea breed in these mangroves. In the last one hundred years, an exotic
invasive mangrove species, Nypa fructicans, originally native to Asia has been spreading
westwards in the Delta.
7.
Barrier Islands: The Niger Delta has 21 barrier islands stretching over 300 km facing
large swells from the South Atlantic. The average island length is 16 km and width 3.3 km, with
extensive beach ridge sets that reach heights of 4 m above sea level and average inlet widths of 2
km. These high ridge sets are quite rare in river deltas worldwide3. In the Niger Delta, they
support some of the last remaining intact lowland-type rain forest left in West Africa due to the
islands’ inaccessibility and inhospitable terrain. Inlets occupy from 10%-25% of the Delta
shoreline. The Niger Delta in particular has numerous drumstick-shaped islands typical of
systems significantly influenced by both waves and tides. In the Niger Delta, river discharge
occurs through only a few of the inlets at any one time, leaving most inlets predominantly
influenced by tides. The barrier island region of the Delta, comprised of the islands themselves
and their corresponding inlets and lagoons, cover approximately 7,000 km2.
8.
Fauna of the Niger Delta. Annex 5 contains a more information on the fauna of the Niger
Delta that is summarized in the following paragraphs.
9.
Mammals: The Delta is home to all of Nigeria's endemic or near-endemic mammal
species and to six IUCN Red List mammals: the (Niger Delta) forest elephant (Loxodonta
Africana cyclotis), the West African manatee (Trichechus senegalensis), the White-throated
guenon (Cercopithecus erythrogaster), the Sclater’s guenon (Cercopithecus sclateri), the pygmy
hippopotamus (Choeropsis liberiensis heslopi) and the Niger Delta red colobus monkey
(Procolobus epieni), have also been recorded. The Niger Delta red colobus is one of the world’s
3
Stutz, M. and Pilkey O. 2002. Global distribution and Morphology of Deltaic Barrier island Systems. Journal of Coastal
Research, Special Issue 36.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
9
25 most endangered primates.4 First discovered only in 1993, it was placed on the list in this
biennium 2008-2010 due to its very small range, bush meat hunting pressure and widespread
degradation of the Niger Delta’s forests. There is every reason to suspect that its numbers are
declining.
10.
The Niger Delta harbors a high diversity of primates including important populations of
two endangered species introduced above: the endemic Sclater’s guenon, and the near-endemic
White-throated guenon. Sclater’s guenon, also known as the Nigerian monkey, is found only in
the Niger Delta region. Described in the late 19th century, it was thought to be extinct by the
1980s. A forest dwelling species, it is an endemic to the Delta forests between the River Niger
and Cross River.
11.
Other species include Mona monkey (Cercopithecus mona), White-nosed guenon
(Cercopithecus nictitans), Tantalus monkey (Cercopithecus tantalus), Red-bellied guenon
(Cercopithecus erythrogaster) Red-eared guenon (Cercopithecus erythrotis) and Red-capped
mangabey (Cercocebus torquatus); and the Putty-nosed monkey (Cercopithecus nictitans). All
are listed as Vulnerable on the IUCN Red List. The endangered Nigeria-Cameroon Chimpanzee
(Pan troglodytes vellerosus), recognised scientifically in 2001 as a distinct sub-species, has a
patchy distribution in the zone in the Delta, with its only populations likely in Bayelsa state,
where in 1993 there were two main population groups: the Ogbotobo beach–ridge forest in the
Dodo-Ramos estuary and the Biseni-Akpede-Asamabiri area of Taylor creek Forest Reserve.
12.
The Niger Delta forest elephant (Loxodonta Africana cyclotis) likely still exists in the
Delta, though recent information on population numbers and condition is not available. Known
populations now are in the Andoni district of Rivers state where Game Reserve exists on paper.
The Niger Delta pygmy hippopotamus (Choeropsis liberiensis heslopi) is essentially un-studied
in recent decades and may be a distinct sub-species. The presence/absence in the Niger Delta of
this poorly documented species is unknown. The pygmy hippo has had no confirmed sightings in
the wild for many decades. Its existence, current status and distribution require confirmation and
definition by a survey of some of the most inaccessible parts of the Delta. The nearest relative of
the Delta pygmy hippo is in Liberia, several hundred kilometers to the west.
13.
The aquatic antelope, sitatunga (Limnotragus spekei) and the water buck (Kobus
ellipsyprimnus) occupy similar habitat, and still exist in the delta and inhabit the tangles
associated with the swamp forests. The Water chevrotain (Hyemoschus aquaticus) is the most
aquatic of antelopes and is dependent on the dense vegetation characteristic of the swamp forests
of the Niger Delta. Considered an endangered species and listed in Nigeria’s Endangered Species
Act it has widespread distribution. Bate’s dwarf antelope (Neotragus batesi) was recorded at
Nembe and Oloibiri. It is thought to be widespread and subject to hunting. Classified as least
concern by IUCN, its population in Nigeria is unknown.
14.
Birds: The greater Niger Delta is home to eleven Important Bird Areas (see maps of these
and other species in Annex 3). About 148 water-related bird species from 38 families have been
Primates in Peril: The World’s 25 Most Endangered Primates 2008–2010. Ed. R. A. Mittermeir et. al. IUCN/SSC Primate
Specialist Group (PSG), International Primatological Society (IPS), and Conservation International (CI).
4
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
10
recorded in the area. These include five species of global conservation concern, one of which, the
Anambra waxbill (Estrilda poliopareia), is endemic to Nigeria. The Anambra waxbill is a very
rare species classified as vulnerable. It was reportedly sighted and photographed at Tombia,
Bayelsa state recently. It is found in the wetter parts of the lower reaches of the Niger to
Forcados in Delta state. Three Important Bird Areas are located within the four pilot states of the
Delta: the Upper Orashi Forest, the Biseni Forests, and the Akassa forests. One or more of these
are known to be home to the Anambra waxbill, as well as other threatened species such as the
Damar tern (Sterna balaenarum), the White-tailed greenbul (Baeopogon clamans), and the
Dusky Crested-flycatcher (Trochocercus nigromitratus).
15.
Fish: The Niger Delta harbors globally outstanding fish fauna and displays exceptional
evolutionary phenomena with its higher taxonomic endemism and distinct species assemblages
with a minimum of 314 species (313 being indigenous) from 158 genera and 64 families found in
the region. A remarkably high number of freshwater species (165) occur in the Niger Delta. This
number excludes permanent freshwater representatives of marine families Denticipidae (denticle
herrings) Clupeidae (herrings) and Eleotridae (sleepers). At least twenty (20) endemic species
have been recorded so far in the Delta. Unique conditions in the Delta have nurtured the
evolution of five monotypic fish Families—Denticipidae, Pantodontidae, Phractolaemidae,
Hepsetidae and Gymnarchidae—the highest concentration of monotypic Families of any
freshwater eco-region in the world. Two species of freshwater stingray occur in the Delta, the
only two freshwater stingray species in Africa: Dasyatis garouaensis (vulnerable), which is
found only in three river systems in Nigeria and Cameroon, and the endangered thorny stingray
(Urogymnus ukpam).
16.
Herptofauna of the Niger Delta are not well known and remained unstudied most of the
20th century. Old records combined with more recent studies (Akani et. al. 2003) provide a
picture of the amphibian diversity found in the Delta. Based upon old and more recent records, it
is possible to estimate that over 30 species of amphibians occur in the Delta, with the number
likely to be higher.
17.
Four species of endangered species of sea turtle visit the beaches of the Delta and
probably breed there: the leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea), green (Chelonia mydas) and olive
ridley (Lepidochelys olivacea), loggerhead (Caretta caretta), and the critically endangered
hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata). Little information on these species in the Delta is readily
available but there of the many O&G companies operating in the area, it is highly likely that
there is more data available on these species.
18.
Crocodiles: Populations of the threatened West African dwarf crocodile (Osteolaemus
tetraspis), the Nile crocodile (Crocodylus niloticus) and the slender-snouted crocodile
(Crocodylus cataphractus) and up to five species of freshwater turtles are under intense hunting
pressure. The delta remains the last stronghold of the dwarf crocodile O.tetraspis, which is
heavily traded. A complex cultural relationship between crocodiles and people in several
communities ensures that some populations of all species are strictly conserved. Recent studies
of DNA and morphology suggest that C. cataphractus may belong in its own genus, Mecistops.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
11
Socio-Economic Context
19.
Known for its large deposits of crude oil and gas, the Niger Delta accounts for over 95%
of Nigeria’s total export annual earnings and about 65% of government revenues (IMF data). To
describe the socio-economic context of the Delta is to describe a paradox of extreme wealth
(over US$ 50 billion in revenue is generated annually by the O&G sector) with the extreme
poverty of the majority of the Delta’s residents. After more than fifty years of exploitation, the
region’s wealth in O&G reserves has not resulted in improved standards of living for local
communities. Less than 50% of the communities within the Niger Delta have electricity, running
water or clean drinking water. On nearly every measure, the Delta’s economic condition is poor
in comparison to the rest of Nigeria. Per capita income in this resource-rich region is below the
national average of $1,980 and most villages in the Niger Delta continue to lack basic services
such as running water, sanitation, health care and schools.
20.
This project will focus in particular on the need to raise the bar for biodiversity
management in the Niger Delta in order to provide protection to the wealth of habitats and
species that the region harbours and to the essential environmental services its ecosystems
provide (e.g. water, nutrient and carbon cycles). It cannot however ignore the staggering reality
of the above-described pradox as this is the context within the project will pursue global
biodiversity benefits. Table 2 shows the data on some socioeconomic indicators of the Niger
Delta States of Akwa Ibom, Bayelsa, Delta and Rivers. Administratively, each of the four core
Delta States is divided into Local Government Areas (see map of Delta States and LGA in
Annex 3). Table 2 also lists the number of LGA in each state.
21.
In 2006, approximately 33 million people lived in the Niger Delta Region (>265 people
per km2), making it one of the most densely populated regions in Africa. The Delta’s population
continues to grow rapidly and is expected to be over 45 million people by 2015. Agricultural
production (including fishing and forestry) is the main income source for most local
communities in the Niger Delta area. More than 44% of the rural people in the Niger Delta
engage in farming (cassava, maize, yam, plantain, palm oil), the gathering of NTFP such as
periwinkles, snails, mushrooms and/or artisanal fishing. About 18% of the population in Niger
Delta Region is engaged in trading, 10% in services (e.g. transport, tailoring, carpentry, and other
artisan work), 11% in miscellaneous. Unsustainable farming systems (slash-and-burn practices,
shifting cultivation) are fairly common as is bush burning for hunting, poaching. The
overexploitation of fisheries’ resources have affected the ecosystems’ functions and therefore
exacerbated the socio-economic fragility of the area.
Table 2: Socio-economic data for four Delta States.
Niger Delta State
Indicator
Population
(2006 census)*
Annual population growth rate
(% total population)
Unemployment Rate
(% of working age adults) (2009)
PRODOC
Nigeria
Akwa
Ibom
Bayelsa
Delta
Rivers
3.9 million
1.7 million
4.1 million
5.2 million
149 million**
3.4
2.9
3.2
3.4
3.2
34.10
38.77
18.40
27.90
19.70
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
12
Niger Delta State
Indicator
Poverty incidence
(% total population) (2004)
Adult literacy rate (any language)
(% total population)
Safe sanitation
(% total population with access to)
Health care
(% total population with access to)
Ownership of personal computer
(% total population)
Local Government Areas
(number in each state)
Nigeria
Akwa
Ibom
Bayelsa
Delta
Rivers
34.82
19.98
45.35
29.09
54.40
79.6
64.3
72.9
80.5
65.7
4.8
12.7
34.3
19.7
57.6
25.5
52.6
47.8
42.3
55.1
1.2
1.4
1.3
1.6
1.3
30
8
25
19
774
Sources: NBS, 2009; NBS, 2004; NBS, 2006; NPC, 2006.
Notes: * According to the 2006 census, the population in the four Niger Delta States would be approx. 15 million. **2009
estimate.
22.
Oil and Gas Industry Context of Niger Delta: Oil and gas exploration in the Niger Delta
region was started by a German company in 1908.5 In 1936, Shell secured exclusive rights to
O&G exploration for all of Nigeria and began prospecting, renewing its prospecting in 1947 in
partnership with BP. This lead to a discovery of oil in 1956 in the Niger Delta. Production at
Oloibiri began in 1958. After Nigeria’s independence in 1960, other companies were invited to
prospect for oil. Soon, forerunners of Agip/Eni, Chevron/Texaco, ExxonMobil, Total and others
were active in search for oil both onshore and offshore. In 1971, the government established a
national oil company that in 1977 became the Nigerian National Petroleum Corp (NNPC).
23.
Today, Nigeria is the 10th largest oil producer in the world, the third largest in Africa and
the most prolific oil producer in Sub-Saharan Africa, with crude production reaching 2.2 million
bbl/d concentrated in four Niger Delta states: Delta, Bayelsa, Rivers and Akwa Ibom. 6 The
country has also significant natural gas reserves (5.29 trillion cubic metres, or ~3% of the world
total) that are sub-explored.7 Production of natural gas reached 35 billion cubic metres in 2007,
or 1.2% of the world total.8 However, due to the lack of a gas infrastructure, 75% of associated
gas is still flared and 12% re-injected, in spite of an ambitious target set by government of
achieving zero flaring in 2010.
24.
The basic model for O&G operations in the Niger Delta is a Joint Operating Agreement
(JOA) between NNPC and operating companies.9 JOA account for approximately 95% of all
crude oil output. The six major JOAs with foreign companies are:
 Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria Limited (SPDC)10
5
See: http://www.allbusiness.com/mining/oil-gas-extraction-crude-petroleum-natural/288169-1.html.
For purposes of definition (and further to reference on this in paragraph 2), the Niger Delta (geographic) Region is composed of
nine states: Ondo, Edo, Delta, Bayelsa, Rivers, Akwa Ibom, Cross Rivers, Imo and Abia. Their total area is 112,000 sq km or
12% of the country’s land surface.
7 2008 BP Statistical Energy Survey.
8 Ibid.
9 See: http://www.nnpcgroup.com/NNPCBusiness/UpstreamVentures.aspx.
10 Besides having a large stake in production, Royal Dutch Shell (British/Dutch) also has significant assets in storing, transporting
and pipelining.
6
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
13
o Largest producer: 40% of the Nigeria’s oil production with more than 80 oil fields, mostly
onshore, on dry lands or mangroves
o Ownership: NNPC 55%, Shell 30%, Elf 10%, Agip 5%
 Chevron Nigeria Limited (CNL)
o Operates in Warri region and offshore in shallow water
o Ownership: NNPC 60%, Chevron 40%
 Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited (MPNU)
o Operates offshore in shallow water in Akwa Ibom and plans to operate in deep water; may take
over Shell as the largest producer in the country
o Ownership: NNPC 60%, ExxonMobil 40%
 Nigerian Agip Oil Company Limited (NAOC)
o Operates small onshore fields
o Ownership: NNPC 60%, Agip 20%, Phillips Petroleum 20%
 Elf Petroleum Nigeria Limited (EPNL)
o Operates on and offshore
o Ownership: NNPC 60%, Elf 40%
 Texaco Overseas Petroleum Company of Nigeria Unlimited (TOPCON)
o Operates five offshore fields
o Ownership: NNPC 60%, Texaco 20%, Chevron 20%
25.
Recent O&G production statistics. The latest statistics for the O&G sector provided by
NNPC are from 2008.11 Annex 4 presents the total production figures by company, average daily
production and percentage contribution to overall production from the Niger Delta. In addition,
the overall figures for crude O&G production in 2008 are presented below:




“Total crude oil and condensate production for the year was 768,745,932 barrels… with a daily average of
2.10 million barrels/day (mmb/pd). This is lower than that of 2007 by 4.27%.”
“In the gas sector, a total of 2,282.44 Billion Standard Cubic Feet (BSCF) of Natural Gas was produced by
eleven (11) Oil Producing Companies. This shows a decrease of 5.51% when compared with 2007
production. And of the quantity produced, 1,664.97 BSCF was utilized, while 617.62 BSCF (27.06%) was
flared.”
“Production by various companies shows that, Mobil had the highest production figure of 167,190,786
barrels with an average of 456,805.43 bpd. This accounts for 21.75% of the total production. Shell
Petroleum Development Company (SPDC) came second with a production figure of 129,328,995 barrels or
353,357.91 bpd, which is 16.82% of the total production. Chevron came third with a production figure of
118,201,198 barrels, averaging 322,954.09 bpd or 15.38% of the total production.”
NPDC, which is NNPC’s upstream subsidiary, engaged in O&G exploration and production activities
produced 12,366,780 barrels.
26.
O&G infrastructure are indicatively shown in Figure 2, which is supplemented by other
maps in Annex 3. More recently, deep water drilling is developing and showing great potential
for finding new oil reserves offshore near the Niger Delta and expanding national production.
Also, the deepwater extraction plants are not affected by the interruptions in operations by local
11
See: http://www.nnpcgroup.com/Portals/0/Monthly%20Performance/2008%20ASB%201st%20Edition%20Web.pdf.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
14
militant attacks and seizures due to civil conflicts and sabotage, all of which have affected
production and transport in near coastal/inner Delta areas.
Figure 2: Niger Delta Oil Infrastructure
Source: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/Nigeria/pdf.pdf.
27.
Company CSR and related policies. All companies in the O&G sector today have policies
and plans with respect to managing the environmental and social impacts of their operations.
These policies and plans are in response to a number of drivers including national regulations,
requirements of investors, and management commitments to corporate social responsibility
(CSR). More challenging, however, is to ascertain a company’s policies and plans with respect to
biodiversity. This challenge is in part due to the complexity of the concept of biodiversity as well
as to the complexity of the response to biodiversity expected by the international community, as
reflected in the objectives and priorities of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).12
28.
As indicated in the company profiles found in Annex 4, the general state of play in the
O&G sector with respect to biodiversity in the Niger Delta is not well developed. Through most
multinational oil companies have stated international commitments to biodiversity and some of
the them have implemented some biodiversity actions at specific locations, there remains a real
opportunity to develop a more strategic and coherent approach to biodiversity for the O&G
operations of the Niger Delta.
29.
Annex 4 profiles a selection of key international company followed by a profile of the
Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation – the majority shareholder in all the O&G projects in
the Niger Delta. The section is concluded by an assessment of the challenges and opportunities
for mainstreaming biodiversity into the O&G sector in the Niger Delta. This provided the basis
12
See: http://cbd.int.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
15
for planning the project’s industry mainstreaming strategy (see ‘2. Profile of Key Industry
Players’ and ‘3. Prospects for Effective Industry Engagement’ in Annex 4).
Institutional context
30.
The following is a brief description of government institutions that are particularly
relevant and important to the mainstreaming of biodiversity into the operations of the O&G
sector of the Niger Delta. FMoE: The overall responsibility for environmental issues within
Nigeria and its coastal waters rests with the Federal Ministry of Environment (FMoE) and its two
parastatal organizations, the Nigerian Environmental Standards and Regulation Enforcement
Agency (NESREA) and the National Oil Spill Disaster Response Agency (NOSDRA).
31.
This responsibility is also shared with another important line ministry, when it comes to
the O&G sector, with other Ministries and parastatal organizations, primarily, the Department of
Petroleum Resources (DPR), the Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation, and the Ministry for
Niger Delta Affairs and its Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC).
32.
The policy priorities of the FMoE are guided by the Environmental Renewal and
Development Initiative (ERDI), which is the environmental agenda of this Administration. The
primary objectives of the ERDI are to inventory Nigeria’s natural resources and environmental
damage, to design and implement restoration measures; and to implement additional measures to
halt further environmental degradation. As elaborated in the NPE, the broad responsibility of
FMoE is to coordinate environmental protection and natural resource conservation for
sustainable development, including to:
 Secure a quality of environment adequate for good health and well-being;
 Conserve and use the environment and natural resources for the benefit of present and future
generations;
 Restore, maintain and enhance the ecosystems and ecological processes essential for the functioning
of the biosphere so as to preserve biological diversity and the principle of optimum sustainable yield
in the use of living natural resources and ecosystem;
 Raise public awareness and promote understanding of the essential linkages between the
environment and development and encourage individual and community participation in
environmental improvement.
33.
In order to ensure effective presence at the state level, the FMoE has an office in each of
the 36 states of the Federation. Each office is headed by a senior personnel designated as
controller of environment. A controller liaises closely with the Ministry headquarters in Abuja.
These may include alerts on natural disasters, environmental pollution, and/or contravention of
EIA guidelines. With the establishment of the FMoE, States also established State Ministries of
Environment (SMoE). These ministries have responsibility to ensure that state laws and
regulations on the environment are followed.
34.
The FMoE’s Dept of Environmental Assessment is responsible for overseeing and
managing the EIA process, as reflected in the bullet point pathway below:
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
16
35.
O&G operator submits project proposal to the FMoE, Department of Environmental
Assessment (DEA) for screening to determine the need for EIA;
 The vetting of Terms of Reference (TOR) by DEA for the EIA studies to ensure that
all significant issues (impacts) are studied in the EIA.
 Optional site visit/verification exercise may be required to aid the process.
 EIA conducted by private consultants/firms. O&G operators often contract baseline
data gathering, stakeholder consultation, and report preparation to independent
consultants and private environmental consulting firms with expertise in the field.
 O&G operators submit draft EIA report to DEA for review.
 In-house DEA review of the draft EIA; comments/feedback provided to O&G
operator.
 Submission of revised final EIA report to DEA.
36.
Both NESREA and NOSDRA are intitutionally linked to FMoE and are relatively new
environmental “watch-dogs”, i.e. in charge of enforcement and overseeing due diligence.
NESREA is responsible for establishing minimum operating standards and proposing policies
and legislation. Although NESREA’s mandate is national and pertains to several types of
environmental issues, much of its focus is on the O&G sector. NOSDRA’s oversight task is
mostly operational with respect to oil spills, with some enforcement responsibilities.
37.
A capacity thorough assessment of FMoE, NESREA, NOSDRA was carried during the
PPG stage13 with the aim of evaluating the capacity of these institutions, as well as of other
relevant agencies, to mainstream biodiversity management priorities with respect to the Niger
Delta’s O&G sector. The focus was on the into regulatory and oversight role of FMoE,
NESREA, NOSDRA. The results of this assessment, presented in Table 3 with through numeric
and percentage scores, show significant gaps with respect to all the five capacity results that were
evaluated (see Annex 1 for the full results of the assessment).
Table 3: Summary of Capacity Assessments - FMoE, NESREA, NOSDRA
Capacity Result
1: Capacities for
Engagement
2: Capacities to
generate, access and
use information and
knowledge
3: Capacities for
strategy, policy and
legislation
development
13
Capacity Target
Relevant individuals and organizations (resource users,
owners, consumers, community and political leaders,
private and public sector managers and experts) engage
proactively and constructively with one another in
managing a global environmental issue.
Individuals and organizations have the skills and
knowledge to research, acquire, communicate, educate
and make use of pertinent information to be able to
diagnose and understand global environmental problems
and potential solutions.
Individuals and organizations have the ability to plan and
develop effective environmental policy and legislation,
related strategies and plans – based on informed decisionmaking processes for global mainstreaming biodiversity.
Total
possible
Score
Scores
Scores
expressed as
percentages of
ideal targets
9
1
11%
15
1
7%
9
2
22%
PPG is the Project Preparation Grant, which was used for developing this project.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
17
Capacity Result
4: Capacities for
management and
implementation
5: Capacities to
monitor and evaluate
Capacity Target
Individuals and organizations have the plan-do-check-act
skills and knowledge to enact environmental policies
and/or regulation decisions, and to plan and execute
relevant sustainable global mainstreaming biodiversity
actions/solutions.
Individuals and organizations have the capacity to
effectively monitor and evaluate project and/or
programme achievements against expected results and to
provide feedback for learning, adaptive management and
suggesting adjustments to the course of action if
necessary to conserve and preserve the global
environment.
TOTAL / Summary
Total
possible
Score
Scores
Scores
expressed as
percentages of
ideal targets
9
0
0%
6
1
17%
48
5
10%
38.
The Ministry of Petroleum Resources (MPR) manages the petroleum sector in Nigeria.
Its mandate is to develop and implement government policies in the oil and energy sectors. The
Department of Petroleum Resources (DPR) is under the auspices of the MPR. Together with
NAPIMS, DPR plays a crucial role in the day-to-day activities throughout the industry. The
DPR:
 Ensures compliance with industry regulations; processes applications for licenses, leases and
permits, establishes and enforces environmental regulations.
 Promotes the exploration and management of prospective acreages for hydrocarbons as well
as the production, import, export, transport, storage and commercialization of oil and gas
resources.
 Plays a key role in issuing concessions (production sharing contracts) and the allotment of
O&G acreages.
 Drafts legislation and regulations and their application for the exploration, transport and
storage of hydrocarbons.
 Supervises all petroleum industry operations being carried out under licenses and leases in the
country in order to ensure compliance with the applicable laws and regulations.
 Enforces safety and environmental regulations and ensuring that those operations conform to
national and international industry practices and standards.
 Maintains records on petroleum industry operations, particularly petroleum reserves,
production and exports of crude oil, gas and condensate, licenses and leases as well as
rendering regular reports on them to Government.
 Advises Government on technical matters and policies that may impact the administration and
control of petroleum.
39.
Ministry of Niger Delta. In response to social unrest in the Niger Delta, the Federal
Government responded recently with a suite of measures, including the creation of the Ministry
of Niger Delta (MND) and the revitalisation of the Niger Delta Development Commission
(NDDC). In addition, the Niger Delta Regional Development Master Plan, which had been in
preparation since 2001, was finally launched in 2007. The Plan is a blueprint for the sustainable
development of the region and the first integrated development plan in Nigeria that is primarily
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
18
based on stakeholders’ participatory inputs and experts’ analytical guidance in 25 sectors,
including health, education, transport, agriculture, environment and others. Derived from the
Master Plan, a ‘Biodiversity Sector Report’ was also prepared in 2008 and it provides a broad
analysis of threats to biodiversity, and general priorities for addressing them, serving as a very
good basis upon which to build a more specific, targeted O&G biodiversity mainstreaming
initiative in the Niger Delta.
40.
The Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources (FMoA) and its State-level
counterparts are relevant to the institutional structure of this project for two main reasons. First,
FMoA is home to the Forestry Department, which plays a national coordinating role for forestry
work and international support for forestry in Nigeria. The Delta contains thousands of hectares
of forest reserve lands owned and managed by the States. Secondly, because of Fisheries –
FMoA Fisheries Department issues fishing permits for large trawlers in the coastal/marine zone
of Nigeria.
41.
International funding for forestry projects passes through the Forestry Department (FD)
to the States. This same bridge function is served by other sectors within the Federal
Government. There is no Biodiversity Department in the Ministry or FD, where biodiversity
conservation is a little-understood side issue. Traditional forest management is still the primary
focus, in which timber is the sole product of land management. Unimpeded access to bush meat
was and still is the primary resource granted to local people. This timber-focused forest
management mostly has continued up to the present time as evidenced by the very small budgets
apportioned to either wildlife or biodiversity issues. This is one of the root causes of biodiversity
and wildlife loss in Nigeria.
42.
Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC). As noted above, the NNPC is the
majority shareholder in all of the O&G projects in the Niger Delta. Though the international
companies most often have operating responsibilities, senior management and financial decisions
are ultimately determined by NNPC. Hence, the company’s commitment to a Green
Environment14 is a critical prerequisite for mainstreaming biodiversity into the O&G sector, as
reflected in excerpts from the company’s Green Environment web-page, which states NNPC’s
commitment to responsible environmental practices as well as its global warming control
measures such as striving with its joint venture (JV) partners to achieve gas flare-down in all its
operations. NNPC is also looking to the Clean Development Mechanism to help reduce carbon
emissions.
43.
In addition to its upstream joint ventures in the Niger Delta, NNPC has a number of
subsidiary companies operating in the region that have relevance to biodiversity. They are
summarized in Table 4 below. Though there is evidence of a commitment to social responsibility
among these subsidiary companies, they do not profile their support for biodiversity.
Nevertheless, there is a potential opportunity to engage these companies along with NNPC’s
joint venture companies in a partnership to mainstream biodiversity into the O&G sector in the
Niger Delta.
14
See: http://www.nnpcgroup.com/PublicRelations/InformationDesk/AGreenEnvironment.aspx.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
19
44.
State-level institutions. Natural resource management institutions exist at the State level,
primarily through State Ministries of Environment (Forestry Departments) and State Ministries
of Agriculture (Fisheries) but capacity for biodiversity conservation, and for integrated
approaches to this, is almost non-existent. Despite this fact, State level institutions are critically
important to effective biodiversity mainstreaming in the Niger Delta. State Ministries of
Environment (SMoE) in Akwa Ibom State, Bayelsa State, Delta State, Rivers State play a key
role in two areas relevant to biodiversity mainstreaming: forest land use and management and the
EIA process.
45.
SMoE maintain a Forestry Department (FD), whose main responsibility is to manage
forest reserve lands in their respective state. These lands belong to the respective State. The
practice of forestry in these forests focuses on timber extraction and aforestation/reforestation.
Ecosystem-based management and forest ecosystem health are, by and large, not management
objectives. Little to no capacity is available to conceive of and implement biodiversity
conservation projects.
46.
State FD are typically the closest thing Nigeria has to a wildlife management entity, and
they are mandated to manage some 38 forest reserves and game sanctuaries encompassing some
195,228 hectares across the four pilot Delta States. The protected area network as it is derives
from the creation of forest reserves whose initial purpose was for wood/timber production. They
mostly small, many lack a legal basis, management plans and adequate enforcement of wildlife
laws. For example, two prime reserves exist in Delta State (Uremuri-Yokri and Olague) but they
are not gazetted and so they do not yet legally exist. The FD’s capacity to fulfill their mandate is
minimal the four pilot States in the Delta. Staffing for such areas is highly insufficient for the
surveillance and management needs. In a state such as Bayelsa, there are only three uniformed
staff covering a land area of over 20,000 km2. In such circumstances, no serious attempts are
made to enforce legal provisions. Farming, illegal harvesting of timber, hunting habitation and
habitat destruction is the norm. Many protected areas are under threat by communities
advocating their sieze back these same lands, as they are not being used as protected areas by
government. (Refer to Annex 6 for a list of these areas).
47.
The Delta State MoE maintains separate Departments in: Ecology (flood and erosion
control/EIA), Forestry (timber production) and Environmental Conservation (afforestation/
reforestation). However, there is no adequate information on the State’s biological diversity
(species, habitats, ecosystems) and their location, condition and extent. The three departments
need training on biodiversity conservation but an opportunity for it is yet to materialise. SMoE
involvement in EIA in the Delta is modest and usually limited to facilitating EIA fieldwork in
State forest or other lands.
48.
State Ministries of Agriculture (SMoA) in Akwa Ibom State, Bayelsa State, Delta State,
Rivers State. (SMoA) are relevant to this project for two primary reasons. First, agriculture
remains the primary means of sustenance for the majority of the Niger Delta’s people and each
SMoA maintains an Agricultural Development Programme (ADP). The ADP in each of the four
pilot states is implementing the National Fadama Development Programme (Phase III), a
nationwide initiative to build capacity in the agricultural sector and invest in rural infrastructure.
The ADP have structured extension services and are mandated to build capacity of rural
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
20
communities and farmers. ADPs are well positioned to help train rural farmers especially in the
area of aquaculture, sustainable agroforestry systems like slash-and-mulch, and other activities
relevant to community-based conservation and sustainable use.
49.
Second, the four SMoA are responsible for managing fisheries in the waters of their
respective state through the Fishery Department, whose primary roles are to enforce fishing
regulations and operate fish hatcheries and aquaculture across the Delta in an effort to enhance
fisheries and help local fisher folk. States do not have specified agencies for the regulation of oil
spills. There are no dedicated programmes for biodiversity conservation in the State Ministries of
Agriculture where the emphasis is on income generation through timber product extraction. At
the State level there is solid evidence of positive trends towards more attention being paid to
biodiversity conservation. For example, in 2001, Edo State Assembly developed and passed the
first Biodiversity Law in Nigeria. Among other things, the law supports more community-based
forest management in Edo State.
Table 4: Stakeholder Analysis
Stakeholder
Relevant roles and Responsibilities, including in project implementation
Federal Institutions and Agencies (Parastatals):
Federal Ministry of The main responsibility of the FMoE is “protect and improve water, air, land, forest and
Environment,
wildlife in Nigeria.” FMoE is the CBD Focal Ministry and responsible for policy
Housing and Urban formulation and implementation of the CBD. The FMoE works in tandem with the oil and
Development
gas industry through its regulatory agencies NOSDRA and NESREA in the regulation of oil,
(FMoE)
gas and other pollutants. The Nigerian National Park Service is under the FMoE and
manages eight national parks around the country. There are no national parks in the Niger
Delta.
The Directorate for Environmental Assessment (DEA) of the FMoE works to ensure that oil
companies actively respect good environmental practices. Several activities, all pipelines,
and many other activities require EIA prior to construction.
FMOE is the lead agency within the Nigerian Government for this project. The Project
Director will come from FMoE (a senior staff person who will chair SC meetings).
Federal
Manage tree plantations in cooperation with States in jointly managed tree plantations
Department of
managed exclusively for timber.
Forestry (FDF)
National Oil Spill
NOSDRA, a Parastatal under the FMoE was established in 2006 and is vested with the
Detection and
responsibility to co-ordinate the implementation of the National Oil Spill Contingency Plan
Response
for Nigeria in accordance with the international Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness,
Agency
Response and Cooperation. NOSDRA is also mandated to identify high risk/priority areas in
(NOSDRA)
the oil-producing environment for protection as well as ensure compliance of oil industry
operations with all existing environmental legislation. The agency has offices in Port
Harcourt (Rivers State), Warri (Delta State) and Uyo (Akwa Ibom State) and in other parts
of the Niger Delta Region. It is partnering with many O&G companies including
ExxonMobil, Elf, Adax, Total, Shell, Agip, AMNI/AFCEN, Oriental Energy and Universal
Energy. Biodiversity conservation objectives are not clearly integrated into NOSDRA’s
work. O&G companies do not report on issues relating to biodiversity. NOSDRA will be a
key actor in mainstreaming biodiversity into its oil spill response efforts.
National
NESREA was established as a parastatal of the FMoE in 2007 and is responsible for
Environmental
enforcing all environmental laws, guidelines, policies, standards and regulations in Nigeria.
Standards
It also has the responsibility to enforce compliance with provisions of international
Regulatory and
agreements on the environment.
Enforcements
Agency
(NESREA)
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
21
Stakeholder
Ministry of Niger
Delta (MND)
Environmental
Management
Department (EMD)
Niger Delta
Development
Commission
(NDDC)
Federal Ministry of
Agriculture
Ministry of
Petroleum
Resources (MPR)
Nigeria National
Petroleum
Corporation
(NNPC)
Nigerian Petroleum
Development
Company
Limited (NPDC)
National Petroleum
Investment
Management
Services
(NAPIMS)
Relevant roles and Responsibilities, including in project implementation
Specifically established in 2000 to address the development problems of the Niger Delta,
MNS is the only Ministry of its kind that has a regional outlook rather than a national one.
There are 33 ministries tasked with carrying out activities that MND is charged with doing
in the Delta. EMD is a new entity, just over one year old. In terms of environment, their
main focus is on remediation of O&G polluted sites. The EMD cooperates with the FMoE
and other agencies such as NOSDRA to coordinate efforts and avoid duplication of effort.
They support the MoE’s enforcement role by reporting polluting problems.
MND will be a key actor in the project, participating in important working groups and
mainstreaming biodiversity into their remediation prioritization efforts. (Outcome 1.3)
The NDDC formulates policies and guidelines for the development of the Niger Delta area.
See text above for more detail. The NDDC will chair the working group to develop the
biodiversity action plan for the Niger Delta, which will be based upon the NDDC’s
“Biodiversity Sector Report.” (Output 1.2)
The Ministry of Agriculture plays a leading role in agricultural development. Their mandate
spans over agriculture, but also related activities. (livestock rearing, fisheries, produce
inspection, forestry).
The MPR manages the petroleum sector in Nigeria through its Department of Petroleum
Resources (DPR) and National Petroleum Investment Management Services (NAPIMS).
The DPR will be a key participant in the project’s law and policy mainstreaming work vis-àvis the PIB/EIA/ EGASPIN process (Output 1.3).
The NNPC is an integrated O&G company, engaged in adding value to the nation’s
hydrocarbon resources for the benefit of all Nigerians and other stakeholders. Oil and
natural gas in Nigeria are federal resources belonging to all the people of Nigeria. The
NNPC is the majority shareholder in all of the major O&G projects in the Niger Delta. In
addition to upstream joint ventures with large international O&G companies, NNPC also has
a number of subsidiary companies operating in the region with relevance to biodiversity.
NNPC will be a key player under Outcomes 2 and 3, in helping to lead the way towards
improved biodiversity action planning and establishing the NDBT.
NPDC is “engaged in O&G exploration and production activities in the hydrocarbon-rich
regions of coastal Nigeria, both onshore and offshore; and more recently, around Equatorial
Guinea.” Further, NPDC has a stated commitment to Community Development
Assistance.15
NAPIMS is the upstream arm of the NNPC and oversees the government's investments in
the Joint Venture producing companies, (JVC's), the Production Sharing Companies
(PSC's), and the Service Contract Companies (SC's). It is NAPIM’s job to ensure a good
return in Nigeria’s O&G investments through effective supervision of the JV, PSC, SC.
NAPIMS is also supposed to play an environmental role by encouraging and adopts global
standards and best practices to ensure that operations are carried out in an environmentally
conducive manner. NAPIMS will likely be an important indirect partner in project activities,
signing off on O&G support for biodiversity mainstreaming.
PPMC ensures “security of supply of petroleum products to the domestic market at low
operating costs” primarily through transport of crude oil via pipelines from the NAPIMS to
the NNPC local refineries.16
Pipelines Products
Marketing
Company Limited
(PPMC)
II State Institutions and Agencies.
State Assemblies
The State level institutions are very important to biodiversity mainstreaming in Nigeria.
Nearly all resources except oil and gas are State responsibilities, not federal. This makes the
State level support in terms of improved laws, policies and institutional capacity critical to
achieving any biodiversity conservation on the ground. State Assemblies will in the long run
support the sustainability of mainstreaming work by helping to allocate more State resources
15
16
See: http://www.npdc-ng.com/.
See: http://www.nnpcgroup.com/NNPCBusiness/Subsidiaries/PPMC.aspx.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
22
Stakeholder
State Ministries of
Environment or
responsible
Ministries
State Ministries of
Agriculture and
Natural Resources
(SMoA) /
Agricultural
Development
Programmes
(ADP)
Cross River State
Forestry
Commission
(CRSFC)
Niger Delta
University, (NDU)
Yenagoa , Bayelsa
State
Rivers State
University of
Science and
Technology (UST),
Port Harcourt,
Rivers State
University of Uyo
(UU), Akwa Ibom
State
Relevant roles and Responsibilities, including in project implementation
to mainstreaming efforts through the NDBT.
Delta, Rivers, Bayelsa and Akw Ibom States MoE all have a Forestry Department, whose
main responsibility is for managing forest reserve lands in their respective state. SMoE will
be key participants in most of the project’s work, including Outputs 1.1, 1.2, 1.3; 2.2, and
3.1.
The four state Ministries of Agriculture and Natural Resources are responsible for managing
fisheries in the waters of their respective state through the Fishery Department, whose
primary role is to enforce fishing regulations. The ADP of the SMoA are mandated to build
capacity of rural communities and farmers and are well positioned to help train rural farmers
in activities relevant to community-based conservation and sustainable use. SMoA will be
important participants in helping to formulate community level BAPs (Output 2.2)
Established in 1999, the CRSFC’s mandate is to sustainably develop, conserve and manage
the forest reserves of the state for the benefit of all stakeholders through sound policies and
programmes. The vision of the CRSFC is “to be home to one of the world’s greenest,
biologically most diverse and richest forest by all global standards”. The breadth of strategic
initiatives (proactive reforestation of degraded areas, biodiversity monitoring, capitalizing
on the carbon markets, strengthening forest reserve boundaries and management,
establishing modern tracking system for timber) by CRSFC makes it a model for other State
Forestry Commissions in the Delta. Cross River may be the place where study tours are
organized from the rest of the Delta.
NDU is a fairly new institution in Yenagoa, Bayelsa State. It has a department of crop
production technology and forestry with qualified staff able to teach different aspects of
biodiversity conservation. May play a role in training under the project (Output 1.4).
The Department of Forestry of the UST has seasoned foresters that have handled
biodiversity conservation for Oil and Gas Industries in Bonny, Rivers State. Will play a role
in gathering data and information (Output 1.1) and training/capacity building (Output 1.4)
The Zoology, Forestry and Fishery departments of UU maintain qualified lecturers capable
of teaching aspects of biodiversity conservation in terrestrial, aquatic/marine habitats. The
Forestry Dept is currently conduct ecological studies at the Stubbs Creeks (310 ha) covering
4-5 LGA and at Essien Udim LGA where Mobil operates. The Fishery Dept carried out
work in partnership with SPDC. The Zoology Dept carried out conservation work on
manatees, elephants, and primates while the Dept of Botany and Ecological Studies has
worked on illegal timber harvesting in some communities in Akwa Ibom. Will play a role in
gathering data and information (Output 1.1) and training/capacity building (Output 1.4)
III. Industry Partners
Oil and gas
O&G industry players are key stakeholders in this project. A thorough analysis of these
companies
players has been carried out during the PPG phase and an industry engagement plan
developed. These are rather thorough and can be found in Annex 4. O&G partners in the
project will be engaged first and foremost through the Oil Production Trade Sector (OPTS)
from the Lagos Chamber of Commerce, which plays a catalytic and decision making role on
policies for these corporate partners.
IV. Non–Government Organizations (NGO)
Nigeria
Established in 1980, the NCF is one of the leading NGOs in Nigeria working on the
Conservation
conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity. NCF works with a range of partners from
Foundation (NCF), local communities, to federal and state agencies and corporations focusing on environmental
Lagos
education, biodiversity conservation, policy advocacy, poverty reduction, and pollution
mitigation. Some NCF projects include: Nipa Palm Utilization (Akwa Ibom); Management
of Becheve Nature Reserve, Obudu Cattle Ranch (Cross Rivers); Biodiversity Action Plan
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
23
Stakeholder
Bioresources
Development and
Conservation
Programme
(BDCP), Abuja
Niger Delta
Wetlands Centre
(NDWC),
Yenagoa, Bayelsa
State
Pro-Natura
International (PNI):
Living Earth
(Nigeria)
Foundation
(LENF)
River Ethiope Trust
Foundation
PANDRILLUS
CERCOPAN
Delta
PRODOC
Relevant roles and Responsibilities, including in project implementation
(Edo); and the IBA Programme. NCF’s has played important roles in a range of
environmental policy and institution building in Nigeria over the past two decades. Output
1.1 -- NCF will take the lead on decision support capacity of the IBAT platform.
The BDCP is a non-profit, NGO dedicated to sustainable utilization and conservation of
biodiversity which leads to poverty alleviation, health improvement, and environmental
conservation. BDCP’s main goal is to ensure the well-being of tropical ecosystems and their
human inhabitants through practical innovative mechanisms of sustainable development,
including bioprospecting research, biodiversity inventory management and dissemination as
well as poverty alleviation through benefit sharing. Output 2.2 – May play a lead role in
helping communities to develop their BAPs that are linked to O&G BAPs.
Since 1992, the NDWC has worked in the fields of in natural resource management and
sustainable development. The ND’s rivers and wetlands are the basis for local livelihoods
but pose unique challenges for effective transportation and economic development. NDWC
uses participatory approaches to evaluate community resource use and in sustainable
management planning and encourages the adoption of new tools for development such as
renewable energy technologies. Output 2.2 – May play a lead role in helping communities
to develop their BAPs that are linked to O&G BAPs.
Founded in Brazil in 1986 to create protected zone of pristine forest it became an
International NGO in 1992. In Nigeria, it is promoting a working model of participatory
community development in which all stakeholders (primary and secondary) actively
participate. Its approach is to link sustainable development for the benefit of rural
communities with conservation of biodiversity. Pro-Natura has been successful in promoting
participatory community development in Akassa Community in Bayelsa State. Its impact is
well recognized by government, donor and development agencies as applicable for the
development of the Niger Delta. Output 1.1; Output 2.2 – May play a lead role in helping
communities to develop their BAPs that are linked to O&G BAPs.
Began work in 1998 with SPDC to assess its community development initiatives in the
Niger Delta. The scoping study of 1996 analyzed some of the needs of the SPDC host
communities and identified opportunities for a LEF programme in Nigeria. Since inception,
LENF has been implementing environment and community development programmes in the
Niger Delta, with particular reference to Bayelsa, Rivers and Cross River States. In these
states, LENF places a premium on working with community institutions, building their
capacity to function effectively and also promoting democratic values and principles in the
management of community affairs. Output 1.1 Information baseline strengthening
Seeks to mobilize and build community capacity for sustainable development and use of
natural resources. The River Ethiope in Delta State is the pilot project to integrate
community rights and responsibilities for river conservation and sustainable use. Has
conducted a biodiversity/ecological baseline survey of River Ethiope ecosystem. Assists in
enforcing EIA for all new projects along the bank of River Ethiope. Currently involved in
implementing SPDC’s new community interface model. Implements environmental
restoration and protection programmes. Output 1.1 Information baseline strengthening.
Based in Calabar, Pandrillus is a primary NGO working on primates in the greater Delta
region. Its focus is captive breeding of the seriously endangered Nigerian sub-species of the
mountain gorilla that has the Cross River National Park as its western limit. It has also
successfully bred the Drill. Their activity is mainly in Cross River just outside the project’s
four Delta states. They have also worked in Akwa Ibom. May play a role in developing 1 or
more community-based pilot projects for funding under the NDBT (Output 2.2, 3.1).
CERCOPAN, an affiliate of The International Primate Protection League, was founded in
1994, with its head office in Calabar, Cross River State. The preservation of biodiversity
through the conservation and rehabilitation of forest primates, conservation, education and
research.
Established in 1996, DEENET operating through a network of NGOs is dedicated to the
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
24
Stakeholder
Environmental
Network
(DEENET):
Relevant roles and Responsibilities, including in project implementation
protection of the flora and fauna of the Niger Delta by encouraging oil companies and
government to formulate policies and remedies for the remediation of the environmentally
degraded environment of the area. Since inception DEENET has organized a number of
stakeholder fora to sensitize local communities to essential issues in biodiversity
conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity for improved community livelihood. It has
also organized study tours and training for its members. Will be an important conduit for
replication of community-based mainstreaming actions to different states and areas around
the Delta.
Ekuri Initiative (A
Established in 1996 and operating out of head office in Calabar, Cross River State, the Ekuri
community forestry Initiative’s objectives are: biodiversity conservation and sustainable forest management; and
project)
rural poverty alleviation and rural development. It has developed sustainable forest
management plans, land use plans and undertaken inventory stock surveys, non-timber
forest products (NTFP) extraction, ecotourism, and biodiversity support schemes.
V. International Organizations and Agencies
World Bank
Implementing the Second National Fadama Development Critical Ecosystem Management
Project, which is engaging every State MoA and their respective ADP in the Delta.
UNEP
Environmental Assessment of Ogoniland. This 18 month, US$10 million project is
conducting an extensive environmental assessment of oil impacted sites in the Ogoni region
of the Niger Delta in Rivers State. Implemented by UNEP in collaboration with UNDP. The
project is being implemented through an extensive, purposeful community-based approach
with local government area coordinators and community liaison assistants in each area
facilitating community understanding and ownership of the process.
Law and policy context
50.
Legislative competence in relation to hydrocarbon operations is vested exclusively in the
Federal Government. State and local governments of the Federation have minimal say on key
decisions regarding O&G activities, including decisions on the siting and monitoring of
operations, and revenue sharing and risk abatement measures that apply for each specific
location. Much of the pertinent legal framework that regulates the industry dates from the 1970’s
and 1980’s and is considered inadequate in the face of the various challenges posed by O&G
operations today, in particular the EIA process which is an essential tool for regulating the
industry from an environmental perspective.
51.
In 1992, Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) regulations were passed, making EIA
mandatory for both public and private sector development projects, including many O&G
exploration, exploitation and production activities. Yet, there are many constraints to the EIA in
terms of making it a useful tool of environmental protection. O&G projects, under the EIA
regulations, are “Category 1” requiring full and mandatory EIA. EIA procedures require O&G
companies to do the following in order to assess potential harm and plan to minimize that harm
to the environment as a result of an O&G development. First, Figure 3 illustrates EIA procedures
in flow-chart form. This figure illustrates the various stages a project goes through from proposal
to approval for implementation, resulting in the issuance of an Environmental Impact Statement
or EIS and the development of an Environmental Management Plan (EMP).
52.
The main steps the EIA process include: 1) The “preliminary assessment” and “scoping”
activities to assess the spatial and temporal dimension of the environmental affects, and; 2)
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
25
Baseline studies to determine the environmental condition prior to project implementation. The
result of these assessments and studies is the EIA report, which is reviewed by the MoE technical
committee. At this point in the review process, the MoE and the proponent mutually establish
conditions and parameters for the follow-up Environmental Management Plan (EMP), which
identifies mitigation measures for areas of impact, a compliance and monitoring plan, and an
audit procedure. The EMP is a document created by each O&G company to provide a framework
for dealing largely with pollution and other environmental risks associated with their site
activities. In many cases it simply formalizes practices already undertaken on the site. More
specifically, the process is not supported by an understanding of how to assess impact of a
project on biodiversity. (This is discussed in more detail further down in chapter ‘Long-term
solution and barriers to achieving the solution’).
Figure 3: Flow chart of Nigeria’s EIA procedures
Source: Echefu N. & Akpofure E. (2010): Environmental Impact Assessment Environmental
Assessment Case Study in Nigeria: regulatory background and procedural framework. Case study 7. In
UNEP (2010): Studies of EIA practice in developing countries UNEP’s Division of Technology,
Industry and Economics, Economic and Trade Branch; edited by Mary McCabe and Barry Sadler.
53.
In addition to the EIA process and the laws and regulations that govern it, there is a
complex and tiered body of laws and policies that are relevant for the management of
biodiversity and O&G sector in the Niger Delta. Table 5 summarizes those.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
26
Table 5: Law and policies relevant to the mainstreaming of biodiversity into Nigeria’s O&G sector.
Name of Law/Policy or
Regulation
Federal Policy
National Policy on
Environment (1989) (NPE)
Agenda 21 for Nigerian
Environment
Ministry of Petroleum
Resources (MoPR) Policy
Document for the Oil and Gas
Industry
Federal Law
Petroleum Industry Bill (PIB)
under final review by National
Assembly as of Oct. 2010.
Associated Gas Re-Injection
Act, Cap. A25, LFN 2004.
Environmental Impact
Assessment Act, Cap. E12,
LFN 2004
Nigerian National Petroleum
Corporation Act, Cap. N123,
LFN 2004
Oil in Navigable Waters Act,
Cap. 06, LFN 2004
Petroleum Act, Cap. P10, LFN
2004
PRODOC
Relevance to the Project/to Mainstreaming of Biodiversity
NPE is the policy document formulated to achieve sustainable development for
Nigeria. Two of the key sectors identified as requiring integration of
environmental concerns and sustainability with development are Mining and
Mineral Resources and Energy Production. NPE aims, among others, to restore,
maintain and enhance the ecosystems and ecological processes essential for the
functioning of the biosphere, to preserve biological diversity and the principle of
optimum sustainable yield in the use of living natural resources and ecosystems.
Seeks to integrate in holistic manner environment policy into development
planning at all levels of government and the private sector; and intensify the
transition to sustainable development. Biodiversity is one of the twelve key
sectors identified, and the Energy sector as one of the developmental activities
impacting on the state of the environment and contributing to environmental
deterioration. It calls on the O&G sector to develop a set of measures to mitigate
any negative impact on the environment.
The policy document seeks to encourage activity in nine areas, but does not
address biodiversity or related issues. The document is focused on increasing
the oil reserve base, expansion and utilization of natural gas, and encouraging
indigenous participation in the petroleum industry.
The new, major overhaul of oil and gas legislation in Nigeria, the PIB, in its
current form has the following relevant provisions:
a) Provides for environmental quality management through submission of
environmental programme/ environmental quality management plan;
b) Provides for consultation with State Departments;
c) Financial provision by licensee/lessee for remediation of environmental
damage;
d) Financial provisions by State and Local Government in cases where damage
has been caused by sabotage;
e) Provides for decommissioning and abandonment in accordance with
guidelines issued by the NPI; and
f) Explicitly provides for restoration in the aftermath of harm to the environment
(i.e. compensation only will no longer be acceptable).
Compelled submission of gas re-injection programmes by the O&G operators.
The Act sets out the procedures and methods to enable the prior consideration of
environmental impact of before projects are carried out. Applies to the O&G
sector. Proper EIAs can assist in the development of a comprehensive set of
measures to mitigate or prevent negative impact on biodiversity; EIA lessons
learned can also assist to update the national oil spill contingency plan for
control, containment, clean-up and restoration. Gives authority of EIA to FMoE.
This Act established the NNPC and empowered it to engage in commercial
activities relating to the petroleum industry; and to enforce all regulatory
measures relating to the general control of the petroleum sector through its
Petroleum Inspectorate department.
The Act implements the terms of the International Convention for the
Prevention of Pollution of the Sea by Oil and makes provisions for such in the
navigable waters of Nigeria.
The Act provides for the exploration of petroleum from the territorial waters and
the continental shelf of Nigeria, and vests the ownership of, and all on-shore and
off-shore revenue from petroleum resources derivable there from in the Federal
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
27
Name of Law/Policy or
Regulation
Petroleum Technology
Development Fund (PTDF)
Act, Cap. P14, LFN 2004
Petroleum Training Institute
Act, Cap. P16, LFN 2004
The Companies and Allied
Matters Act (1999)
Federal Regulations
Associated Gas Re- Injection
(continued Flaring of Gas)
Regulations, SI.43 of 1984.
Petroleum (Drilling &
Production) Regulations, 1969
Petroleum Refining
Regulations, 1974
Relevance to the Project/to Mainstreaming of Biodiversity
Government. This Act grants the Minister power to make regulations to prevent
pollution of watercourses and the atmosphere, investigate accidents, and
regulate the construction, maintenance and operation of installations used.
The goal of this Act is to establish a development fund for the purposes of
training and education of Nigerians in the petroleum industry.
Establishes the Petroleum Training Institute. It has no focus on biodiversity but
may be able to incorporate biodiversity-related courses.
Provides the legal basis for creating a Trust Fund, the appointment of Trustees
and the setting up of articles of association and registering with the Corporate
Affairs Commission.
The Regulations provide for the conditions for issuance of certificate for
continued flaring of gas. None of the conditions relate to biodiversity or impact
on local crops or ecosystems.
The regulation has a number of provisions on compensation and restoration that
can well serve the goal of mainstreaming biodiversity. A weakness of the
regulation is that compensation is paid to individuals whose land has been
damaged by the cutting of productive trees or damaging croplands and
individuals are generally not able to deal with biodiversity and restoration
issues, which are often scientifically complex and wide-ranging. Also,
biodiversity is not valued and there is no accepted process for valuing
biodiversity in Nigeria.
The Regulations relate to procedures guiding the establishment and
management of refinery. It also enjoins operators to observe good refining
practice.
Federal Guidelines
Environmental Guidelines and
Standards for the Petroleum
Industry in Nigeria (EGASPIN)
1991 (Revised Edition 2002)
Environmental Impact
Assessment – Procedural
Guidelines
Environmental Impact
Assessment Sectoral
Guidelines for Oil and Gas
Industry Projects, 1995
Guideline for Accreditation of
Oil Service Companies
(Ministry of Petroleum).
These environmental guidelines and standards issued by the DPR cover the
control of and impacts from pollution from O&G operations. Requires EIA to
be conducted by O&G companies as a preliminary activity during project
development.
Following the promulgation of EIA Act, these guidelines were developed as a
National Environmental Procedure. It indicates the steps to be followed in the
EIA process from project conception to commissioning.
This EIA sectoral guidelines for the O&G industries are presented in five subsectors, namely, Oil Exploration & Production Onshore, Oil and Gas Production
& Exploration Offshore, Oil and Gas Pipeline, Petroleum Refining, and
Petrochemicals.
The Guideline was developed for accreditation of oil industry services
companies. It is relevant to the extent that the DPR in registering companies
requests them to also submit their environmental action plan.
Interim Guidelines &
Requirements for FPSO
Operating in Nigerian Waters
This was evolved by the then National Maritime Authority, now Nigeria
Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA). It mandates the
specification of FPSO that will operate in Nigerian waters.
Procedure Guide for the
Construction and Maintenance
of Fixed Offshore Platforms
Key components of these guidelines are the environmental and safety
considerations that must be factored into the design of fixed offshore platforms.
These considerations have quickly become out-dated in light of the Gulf of
Mexico deepwater oil well disaster.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
28
54.
Hierarchy of the Relevant Laws. The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (the
“1999 Constitution”) is the basic law of Nigeria, and its provisions are supreme over all other
laws. The 1999 Constitution envisages the need to protect the country’s environment, including
its ecosystems and natural resources. There is a specific reference to environment in Chapter II
of the 1999 Constitution, dealing with Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State
Policy.
55.
Under the Constitution, the Federal Government has exclusive jurisdiction on all matters
listed in the Exclusive Legislative List. It has concurrent jurisdiction with the States on all
matters listed in the Concurrent Legislative List. Any State enactment that touches either directly
or by indirectly on a matter contained in the Exclusive List is to that extent void. In relation to
matters on the Concurrent List, both the Federal Government and States have power to legislate
thereon. However, where a law made by a State is inconsistent with a Federal enactment, the
inconsistency in the State law shall be void.
56.
All Federal laws, old or new, are of the same hierarchy. They act to complement one
another and no law loses its force unless expressly repealed. In the event of a conflict or
inconsistency, the conflicting laws would have to be subjected to judicial interpretation. It is the
same way that State laws operate in relation to one another.
57.
Overall, land, forestry and forest resources are under State control. Federal powers
regarding forest resources and wildlife are limited to federal reserves and national parks. Indeed,
the Federal Government requires the consent of the relevant State(s) in designating a national
park or forest reserve. Consequently, the jurisdiction to manage biodiversity issues reside more
with the States. However, the entire property in and control of all minerals, O&G in under or
upon any land or territorial waters vest exclusively with the Federal Government. Section 28 (4)
of the Land Use Act further obligates the Governor of a State (who holds all lands in the State in
trust for all Nigerians) to revoke a right of occupancy if the land is required for petroleum
operations by the Federal Government, with compensation paid to the former right holder.
58.
Traditional natural resource management. Beneath the modern context of natural
resource management in Nigeria is a traditional one. In pre-colonial times, a complex set of land
ownership existed, which still exists de facto in a traditional unwritten sense. Throughout the
Delta, many lands, forest, lakes and bodies of water are 'owned' by families or communities and
many are designated as sacred sites. These family or community resources (forests/lakes etc) are
recognised and 'managed' through tradition that is respected by neighboring communities. Nonmembers of a family community may be effectively excluded from access/use of such
forest/lakes and each family or community can dictate when and how frequently lakes may be
fished and forests hunted or timbered.
59.
In some instances, states have recorded such community-owned bodies of water.
Consider Bayelsa State as an example. Bayelsa is known to have at least nine community or
family owned crocodile conservation areas where fisheries are specially managed to ensure
crocodile population health. In addition, sixteen towns in Bayelsa State have one or more sacred
lakes that are subject to special management and are in effect, local protected areas. To date,
efforts at the State and Federal levels level have not built upon these conservation resources. The
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
29
immigration of different ethnic groups into lands once unavailable and the diminishment of
many traditions that support conservation, such as sacred forests which are not officially
recognized on government lists of conservation areas and protected area, but they are protected
and “specially managed” none-the-less.
60.
Private Sector Policy: The principal models which leading companies in the energy
industry currently use manage environmental issues are Environmental Management System
(EMS); or an integrated Health, Safety and Environmental Management System (HSEMS). The
EMS model is based on International Organization for Standardization’s EMS Specification with
Guidance for Use (ISO 14001) published in 1996. The HSEMS model is based on guidelines for
the development and application of HSEMS published by the International Oil and Gas
Producers Association (OGP) in 1994.
61.
Embedded in these systems are the Environmental and Social Impact Assessments
(ESIA) which are important tools for understanding and addressing impacts to biodiversity,
particularly for new development projects. This tool is used to address environmental and social
impacts in a single assessment process in recognition that environmental and social impacts are
often inextricably linked, particularly related to issues such as health impacts of pollution or
traditional use of ecological resources by indigenous and rural communities.
62.
Both EMS/HSEMS and ESIA are dynamic and evolve through the different stages of
each project’s lifecycle. Relevant biodiversity considerations can be integrated into specific
components and steps of an EMS/HSEMS at both the project and corporate levels, as well as into
an integrated ESIA process that considers impacts using a broad-scale ecosystem approach. The
Biodiversity Action Planning process introduced under Outcome 2 of this project seeks to do just
that – to integrate biodiversity considerations into the EMS/HSEMS/ESIA process.
63.
Investor Requirements: As important for business as regulations – notably for large-scale
business projects in developing countries – are the social and environmental requirements
mandated by investors. For example, the Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC)
requires of its borrowers that “plans for projects with particularly large potential adverse impact
must be accompanied by detailed environmental management plans.”17
64.
Perhaps the most influential biodiversity and development-related investor requirements
are the International Finance Corporation’s (IFC) Performance Standards on Social and
Environmental Sustainability:
1: Social and Environmental Assessment and Management Systems
2: Labor and Working Conditions
3: Pollution Prevention and Abatement
4: Community Health, Safety and Security
5: Land Acquisition and Involuntary Resettlement
6: Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Natural Resource Management
7: Indigenous Peoples
8: Cultural Heritage
17
Japan Bank for International Cooperation Guidelines for Confirmation of Environmental and Social Considerations (July
2009), p. 16. See: http://www.jbic.go.jp/en/about/environment/guideline/business/pdf/pdf_01.pdf.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
30
65.
Though all are directly relevant to the four core biodiversity objectives (conservation,
sustainability, equity and development) Performance Standard 6 is particularly important. For
example, the following two paragraphs clearly provide a basis for financing biodiversity
management plans of areas ‘outside the fence’:
“8. Mitigation measures will be designed to achieve no net loss of biodiversity where feasible, and may
include a combination of actions, such as:
 Post-operation restoration of habitats
 Offset of losses through the creation of ecologically comparable area(s) that is managed for biodiversity
 Compensation to direct users of biodiversity”
“14. The client will manage renewable natural resources in a sustainable manner. Where possible, the client
will demonstrate the sustainable management of the resources through an appropriate system of independent
certification.”18
66.
The IFC’s Performance Standards – to be updated in 2011 – are particularly influential
because they have been adopted by the Equator Principles Association, which represents 67
multinational banks responsible for most of the project finance in developing countries. The
recently adopted Governance Rules of the Association state the following and provide a solid
investment basis for biodiversity action:
“b) The aim of the Principles is to introduce good practice for financial institutions in the management of
social and environmental risks when providing Project Finance loans or Project Finance Advisory Services.”
“c) The Principles are a framework to require the implementation of standards of good practice in relation to
the social and environmental issues arising in projects that are the subject of Project Finance. The EPFIs
having so decided, the Equator Principles specify that the current standards required shall be either:
i) The Performance Standards and the Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines of the IFC where
projects are located in countries that are not High Income OECD countries (as defined by the World Bank
Development Indicators Database), or
ii) Local or national law relating to social and environmental matters where projects are located in High
Income OECD Countries (as defined by the World Bank Development Indicators Database).”
“d) The Principles apply where the EPFIs provide Project Finance loans or Project Finance Advisory
Services for projects having a total capital cost of US$ 10 million or more, to provide that those projects are
developed in a socially responsible manner and reflect sound environmental management practices. Negative
impacts on project-affected ecosystems and communities should be avoided where possible, and if these
impacts are unavoidable, they should be reduced, mitigated and/or compensated for appropriately.” 19
THREATS, ROOT CAUSES AND IMPACTS
67.
The primary threats to biodiversity in the Niger Delta are: Pollution; Habitat degradation
and land-use change; Over-harvesting of natural resources, and; Invasive alien species.
68.
From the analysis that will follow, it will become clear that not all of the threats to the
Niger Delta’s biodiversity are linked to the O&G sector. Threats related to oil spil pollution,
affecting both land and water, as well as gas flaring and land clearings for establishing wells,
18
IFC Performance Standard 6. (30 April 2006).
Equator Principles Association. See: http://www.equator-principles.com/documents/EP_Governance_Rules_April_2010.pdf.
19The
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
31
pipelines and plants are obviously linked to the industry’s activities. Other threats such as land
clearings for agriculture, unsustainable harvest of trees, fish and other biological resources
cannot be attributed to industry. As it will be seen, these threats are also significant.
69.
The project is working with the concept of “inside the fence” and “outside the fence” (see
Box 1), where the former is the area under direct control/use by the O&G companies. The socioeconomic context in the Niger Delta is complex: widespread poverty, fairly high population
density in some areas and with the O&G industry functioning as the main economic motor. As
such, attributing threats and impacts to biodiversity ‘outside the fence’ is challenging. The
situation is particularly blurred immediately ‘outside the fence’. There is however recognition
from industry that their impacts may have a wider area of influence than just ‘inside the fence’.
The question is how to address threats to biological resources in this biodiversity rich and
challenged region where a GEF intervention can effectively make a difference. The project
strategy is dealing with that.
Box 1: “Inside the Fence” & “Outside the Fence”
These terms refer to the relationship between the O&G sector and the biodiversity aspects of its
social/environmental context.
Inside the fence: refers to the area of some 600 sq km under direct control/use by the O&G companies (assets,
facilities, pipeline corridor rights-of-way, etc.). It corresponds to the physical footprint of the O&G company
assets within this area as admitted by the industry. At project start, this will be considered the project’s initial
‘direct landscape mainstreaming target’. This area may evolve with project implementation, as threats and impacts
are more adequately assessed. It should not be discarded that threats, risks and impacts caused by O&G industry
may spill over the ‘inside the fence’ area.
Outside the fence: Refers to the area within the broader landscape not under the direct control/use by the O&G
companies themselves (most of the Niger Delta). The geographic focus of the project is on the four core Nigerian
States within the Niger Delta (Akwa Ibom, Bayelsa, Delta, and Rivers States), which combined encompass an area
of 46,420 sq km. This will, in turn, be considered the ‘indirect landscape mainstreaming target’).
70.
As it will be seen in the project strategy, the project will offer a credible strategy for
addressing threats to the Niger Delta’s biodiversity, first and foremost, those that are posed by
the industry. It will however also contribute to mitigating other threats by e.g. facilitating the
availability of finance for communities to improve local management of biodiversity.
71.
In the paragraphs that follow is the analysis of threats and impacts to the Niger Delta’s
biodiversity and their root causes.
Pollution
72.
Oil spills, unlined/ad-hoc waste pits and the long-term flaring of natural gas are one of
the most important threats to biodiversity in the Niger Delta emanating from existing and past
O&G operations. Water pollution is the single most important threat to freshwater, coastal, and
marine ecosystems of the Niger Delta with significant ongoing and potential impacts on fisheries
and on the trophic chain in mangroves as off-shore drilling increases.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
32
73.
In the last five decades that oil and gas activities have become a regular aspect of the
Niger delta landscape, varying amounts of spilled oil have been claimed. The actual figures have
been contentious due to poor record keeping and lack of transparency. The NNPC places the
quantity of oil spilled into the environment each year at 2,500 cubic meters20 (660,430
gallons/year) with an average of 300 individual spills/year, or almost one spill/day. However,
because these estimates do not take into account “minor” spills, the World Bank argues that the
true quantity of oil spilled into the environment could be as much as ten times this number or 25
thousand cubic meters each year (6,6 million gallons/year). The Department of Petroleum
Resources (DPR) estimates that between 1976-1996 a total of 4,647 incidents spilled
approximately 2,369,470 barrels (99,517,740 gallons) of oil into the Delta’s aquatic and marine
ecosystems. On an annual basis, this equates to 4,975,887 gallons of oil, a figure closer to the
World Bank’s. Of this quantity, an estimated 1,820,410.5 barrels (77%) were lost to the
environment. The largest recorded spills so far occurred in 1979-1980 with a net volume of
694,000 barrels and 600,000 barrels respectively. More recent data is hard to come by, but
between 1997 and 2001, Nigeria recorded a total number of 2,097 oil spill incidents. A
convergence of opinion results in figures of approximately 546 million gallons (~11
million/year).21,22
74.
Thousands of barrels of oil have been spilled into the environment as a result of corroded
and ill-maintained oil pipelines and oil tanks in the Delta. Some of these facilities have been in
use for decades without replacement or adequate maintenance. Sabotage is another major cause
of oil spillage. Organized “oil pirate” groups engage in oil bunkering, stealing Nigeria's crude oil
at the phenomenal rate of nearly 300,000 bpd. They damage and destroy oil pipelines in their
effort to steal oil from them. Nigeria lost about N7.7 billion in 2002 as a result of oil theft and
related pipeline damage (NNPC/PPMC). In Nigeria, 50% of oil spills are due to corrosion, 28%
to sabotage and 21% to oil production operations due to engineering drills, inability to
effectively control oil wells, failure of machines, and inadequate care in loading and unloading
oil vessels.
75.
Impacts of oil spills: The Delta’s aquatic and marine environments have been affected the
most by these spills: 25% of the oil spill events have occurred in the Delta’s freshwater wetlands,
69% in the offshore environment and only 6% on land. The Delta’s critical mangrove belt is
literally “caught in the middle:” oil spilled up stream in the freshwater wetland areas is
ultimately flows downstream to the mangroves, while wave and tidal action brings oil spilled
offshore into the near-shore mangrove estuarine ecosystem.
76.
The actual extent of the ecological disaster in the Delta is uncertain. An estimated 10% of
Nigerian mangrove ecosystems have been degraded or destroyed by oil pollution or settlement
activity. To be sure, oil pollution is not the only threat affecting mangroves, but mangroves are
20
@ 6.3 barrels/m3 = 15,725 barrels or 660,430 gallons/year.
Fatai O. et. al. 2006. Proceedings from the 5th International Federation of Surveyors Regional Conference Accra,
Ghana, March 8-11, 2006. Marine and Coastal Zone Management. “Oil Spill Disaster Monitoring Along Nigerian
Coastline- Promoting Land Administration and Good Governance.”
22
Zabbey, N. 2004. Impacts of Extractive Industries on the Biodiversity on the Niger-Delta Region, Nigeria. Eleme
Centre for Environment, Human Rights and Development.
21
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
33
highly susceptible to oil exposure, which can kill mangroves within a few weeks to several
months. Oil affects mangroves in two principal ways: first, from physical effects; second, the
true toxicological effects of the petroleum. In terms of physical effects, mangroves have
developed a complex series of physiological mechanisms to enable them to survive in a lowoxygen, high-salinity world. Many, if not most, of these adaptations depend on unimpeded
exchange with either air through the mangroves’ pneumatophores and their lenticels or for the
mediation of salts via water through the leaves and submerged roots of the mangrove. Oil
coatings interfere with salt exchange (air) and salt mediation (water).
77.
Lighter oils are more acutely toxic to mangroves than are heavier oils. Oil-impacted
mangroves may suffer yellowed leaves, defoliation, and tree death. More subtle responses
include branching of pneumatophores (vertical root structures), germination failure, decreased
canopy cover, increased rate of mutation, and increased sensitivity to other stresses. Although oil
spills are time-limited events, the effects are aggravated because the oil pollution becomes a
chronic, annually reappearing threat. In many parts of the Delta, the oily substance is stored in
the soil and re-released with each annual flooding event. Reliable, Delta-wide figures on the
extent and condition of mangrove forests are not available.
78.
Oil pollution also creates other impacts, such as dead zones in aquatic and marine
habitats. This happens when bacteria multiply to consume spilled hydrocarbons and utilize most
of the dissolved oxygen in the water in the process, creating dead zones where no aquatic or
marine life can be sustained.
79.
Oil in water impacts on biochemical integrity for a wide array of organisms ranging from
micro-organisms up to vertebrates, degrading the complex trophic chains of the wetlands,
including regionally vital mangrove tracts means that shell- and fin fisheries in the Gulf of
Guinea are jeopardized. By some estimates, over 60% of fish caught between the Gulf of Guinea
and Angola breed in the mangrove belt of the Niger Delta (World Rainforest Movement 2002).
80.
Oil harms wildlife through physical contact, ingestion, inhalation and absorption.
Floating oil can contaminate plankton, algae, fish or amphibian eggs, and the larvae of various
invertebrates, which can lead to lead to unnatural modifications in sex ratios or physical
deformities in young. Fish that feed on these organisms can subsequently become contaminated.
Larger animals in the food chain, including bigger fish, birds, terrestrial mammals, and even
humans may then consume contaminated organisms. Initially, oil has the greatest impacts on
species that utilize the water surface, such as waterfowl and aquatic or marine mammals, and
species that inhabit the near shore environment.
81.
Long-term ecological effects may be worse. Oil can poison the sensitive marine and
coastal organic substrate, interrupting the food chain on which fish and other species depend, and
on which their reproductive success is based. Commercial fishing may be affected permanently.
Wildlife other than fish, including mammals, reptiles, and birds that live in the Delta, are also
poisoned by oil waste. The hazards for wildlife include toxic effects of exposure or ingestion,
injuries such as smothering and deterioration of thermal insulation, and damage to their
reproductive systems and behaviors. Long-term ecological effects that contaminate or destroy the
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
34
marine organic substrate and thereby interrupt the food chain are also harmful to the wildlife, so
species populations may change or disappear.
82.
Apart from the mentioned impacts on biodiversity, oil pollution has significant
consequences for people’s welfare in affected areas. In agricultural communities, a year's supply
of food can be often destroyed and drinking water contaminated by only a minor leak,
debilitating farming families who depend on the land for their livelihood. Safety has also become
a concern as a result of the high level of oil spilling in the Delta. Illegal fuel siphoning as a result
of the thriving black market for fuel products has increased the number of oil pipeline explosions
in recent years. In July 2000, a pipeline explosion outside the city of Warri killed 250 people.
The NNPC reported 800 cases of pipeline piracy from January through October 2000. Since
December 200523, Nigeria has experienced increased pipeline vandalism, kidnappings and
militant takeovers of oil facilities in the Niger Delta.
83.
Air Pollution: Nigeria is among the top 10 countries24 responsible for 75% of gas flaring
emissions in the world. Today, there are about 123 flaring sites in the region. Most flares burn 24
hours a day; several have been burning for over fifty years. Currently, gas flaring amounts to
about 18.9 billion cubic meters (BCM) per annum25, which translates to greenhouse gas
emissions of 45 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent, making Nigeria one the highest emitters of
greenhouse gases in Africa26. At current estimated market prices for emission reductions of
around EUR 5-15 per ton of CO2, possible market values of emissions reductions are
approximately EUR 225-675 million per year.
84.
Gas flaring is thought to change local climate conditions and to create acid rain with
unknown or measured impacts regionally and even globally. One study explored the spatial
variability effects of gas flaring on the growth and development of common crops in the Delta,
including cassava and pepper. The results suggest that a spatial gradient exists in the effects of
gas flares on crop development. Retardation in crop development manifests in decreased
dimensions of leaf lengths and widths of cassava and pepper crops closer to the gas flare point.
Statistical analysis also confirms that cassava yields are higher at locations further away from the
flare point. In addition, the amount of starch and ascorbic acid in cassava decreased when the
plant is grown closer to the gas flare. High temperatures around the gas flare appear to be the
most likely cause of this retardation.27
85.
Flared gas includes several toxic substances and causes acid rain that compromises water
quality. There is strong anecdotal evidence that air pollution may have altered the vegetation of
the area, replacing natural vegetation with weed grasses indicating that the soil is no longer
fertile for crop cultivation. Examples of this can be seen in Opuama and Sekewu communities in
23
Source: http://www.eia.doe.gov/cabs/Nigeria/Full.html
24
Ibid.
25
IFC Consulting. 2006. Nigeria: Carbon Credit Development for Flare Reduction Projects. World Bank GGFR . See
Link.
26
P. B. Eregha and I. R. Irughe. 2009. Oil Induced Environmental Degradation in the Niger Delta: The Multiplier
Effects. Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa (Volume 11, No.4, 2009).
27
Dung, E.J. et. al. 2008. The effects of gas flaring on crops in the Niger Delta, Nigeria. GeoJournal. Vol. 73.
Number 4. Pp. 297-305.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
35
the Warri North Local Government Area of Delta State. It is evident that gas flaring has affected
the ozone layer of the region leading to micro-climate change that is unhealthy to crops
cultivation (IPCC, 2007).
Habitat degradation and land-use change.
86.
Ecologically destructive land-use practices in the delta, including the O&G exploration
and facility construction and sand dredging damage and fragment ecosystems and habitats across
the Delta. Different phases of the oil exploration, production, refining and transportation chain
involve activities that impact the biodiversity of the Niger delta. The laying of seismic lines and
dredging are two activities that can degrade habitat significantly. In laying seismic lines, pristine
forest tracts are cut and fragmented habitat is destroyed for access with the openings in the forest
or wetland creating opportunities for illegal timber cutting in previously inaccessible areas.
87.
Inappropriate construction practices employed for oil and gas infrastructure exposes the
delta environment to a variety of hazards. Dredge spoils cause acidification of water bodies,
waterways are filled or short cut canals dug, causing saltwater intrusion into previously
freshwater areas. Other sources include pouring of drilling mud into surface water, and
discharging producer water containing hydrocarbons into the environment. More than 7,000 km
of pipelines have been laid to transport oil and gas across all types of terrain in the delta. Habitat
alteration may involve construction of ‘burrow pits’ dug to extract sand or gravel during
construction of the many access routes into forest or some other terrain, causing siltation and
erosion. Some of these pipelines pass through protected areas and other sensitive sites. The age
and condition of these pipes varies; many are decrepit and a chronic source of leakages.
88.
Inappropriate waste management: The O&G sector over time has created unlined pits into
which a miscellany of toxic wastes including drill cuttings, cement slurry/dust, condemned pipes,
filters, and machinery parts are dumped throughout the Niger delta. Usually, these wastes are not
pre-treated before discharge into the environment. Most pits are open and result in the direct
mortality of thousands of waterbirds annually. These pits may occasionally overflow during the
rainy season and the toxic wastes spread through the wetlands of the delta.
89.
Silica sand and gravel extraction: These two solid minerals extracted widely in the Niger
delta. Deposits of these minerals occur over a wide swathe of the shallow inner continental shelf
reaching depths of 40 meters. Recent heightened extraction of these minerals is driven by
industrialization and population influx into the delta has the accelerated demand for housing and
construction materials. The impacts on biodiversity take several forms. Dredging in shallow
inland waters for sand causes river sliding, slumping, bank collapse, and riparian erosion
affecting biodiversity significantly. Sand dredging alters water quality, increases suspended
particles, leading to increased turbidity and reduced photosynthetic capacity of phytoplankton.
Columns of particulate matter are transported away to far locations, jeopardizing sensitive
nursery and breeding grounds, reducing reproductive success and impairing the filer feeding
mechanisms of critical benthic fauna. Sand dredging is largely unregulated and occurs virtually
anywhere. The concept that sand is a natural resource that needs to be regulated is just being
conceptualized in Nigeria. Solid minerals are under federal law, however the management of
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
36
sand and silica resources is clearly a local issue, requiring innovative, practical solutions within
Nigeria’s law and policy framework.
90.
Inappropriate management of the water regime, such as dam and canal building,
construction of jetties, sand and gravel mining, dredging and removal of vegetation, reduced
drainage, and large boat traffic, modify critical habitats in the delta by degrading the natural
processes of sediment transport through the Delta. The result is erosion, flooding, declines in
water quality and quantity, exotic species invasions (e.g. water hyacinth), and ecosystem
degradation.
91.
Dam development upstream on the Niger River within Nigeria and in upstream countries
resulted in serious reduction of both water and sediment transport to the Delta. In Nigeria, two
dams have been constructed at New Bussa and Jebba. The Kainji Dam complex is the largest
impoundment on the Niger and extends for about 10 km. The concrete section is 65 m (215 ft)
high. More dams are under construction in the Niger basin and this trend will no doubt continue
in the water-starved interior of West Africa. For the sake of the Niger Delta, the critical
challenge will be to ensure the dams are designed, built and managed in a way to maximize
natural flooding and sediment transport processes.
92.
Investigations of the Niger Delta’s progradation rate in the early 1990s revealed a net
retreat of coastline in the eastern section of the Niger Delta and only marginal accretion in the
western Niger Delta. It also contrasts with that of an accreting coastline reported in the mid
1960s, which reflected the pre-Kainji Dam status. Recent observations of the coastline suggest a
strong erosional stress and a shift in existing ecological balance,28 suggesting that there is not
enough sediment reaching some sections of the coast to sustain the existing ecological balance
between coastal erosive processes and constructive river morphological processes. These
imbalances in coastal equilibrium have led to relative stagnation in the progradation of the Niger
Delta. They are attributable to impoundment of water and sediments in upstream dams and
reservoirs. An inspection of the drainage zones in the Niger Delta reveal drainage rivers of
limited extent and catchment size in the eastern Niger Delta, implying impediments in sediment
supply, thus making the problem more severe in this eastern Delta. This deduction is
strengthened by the skewed discharge and sediment distribution in favour of the western Delta
up to 1992, which resulted in the invasion of large expanses of mangrove swamps in the western
Niger Delta by tropical forest.
93.
Agricultural land use in the oil-producing Delta States is characterized by ever expanding
land clearing activity. Agriculture in the Delta is largely subsistence, shifting cultivation using
slash-and-burn to prepare the land from site to site. Recently, however, plantations of industrial
crops have emerged. Two industrial plantation crops have taken up huge tracts of land in the
delta. These are the indigenous oil palm and the introduced rubber (Hevea brasilensis). Forest
plantations have also been introduced using fast-growing exotic species of Gmelina, teak and
pine for timber and pulp to feed paper mills. Nigeria currently produces a total of 225,000 ha of
oil palm and 50% of this is in the Niger delta. Rubber also covers thousands of hectares in the
Delta. Traditional oil palm production does not involve clear-cutting, although low productivity
28 Abam, T. 2001. Hydroiogical Sciences-'ouriwl-des Sciences Hydrologiques, 46(1) February.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
37
is a consequence of the traditional system. The establishment of these new industrial plantations
involves clear-cutting, resulting in habitat loss for many globally significant species in the Delta.
In the Delta, the percent of land under cultivation ranges from 75.5% in Akwa Ibom, 46.9% in
Delta and 30% in Rivers & Bayelsa States. Agriculture encroachment into protected areas and
forest reserves in the Delta is rife and an indicator of land hunger (Federal Ministry of
Agriculture, Department of Forestry, Land use and Vegetation cover, 1997).
Over-harvesting of natural resources.
94.
The overharvest of natural resources, including timber (for fuel wood and construction),
NTFP (for fuel, medicine and food) results in habitat fragmentation, degradation (erosion,
flooding) and destruction, and in exotic species invasions (e.g. Nypa Palm in mangrove areas).
Forestry practice in Nigeria prioritizes timber production to the detriment of biodiversity. Forests
are viewed not as complex ecosystems but rather standing timber and the resulting clear-cutting
harvest techniques degrade and destroy native forest ecosystems. In Cross Rivers state, where
concessions are issued controlled by the state government, both legal and illegal commercial
harvesting has been particularly destructive to the point that a ban on logging was introduced in
2009. In other states, species such as the Niger Delta red colobus, with a small home range of
1,500 km2, is threatened by over-harvesting of its main food tree as well as by the dredging of
canals to transport timber, which in turn alter the natural hydrology of the freshwater wetland
forests, rendering natural recovery by native plant species more difficult.
95.
Over-harvest is not sustainable, with the resulting economic impacts being increasingly
apparent in communities across the Delta. The Delta town of Sapele was home until recently to
the largest timber and plywood factory in West Africa. It is now unable to operate due to an
inadequate supply of logs. Large volumes of timber are sawn to meet construction purposes in
nearby city of Warri. Wood waste is dumped into the Ethiope and Warri rivers smothering the
benthic zone, using up dissolved oxygen, and degrading habitats.
96.
Open access and unregulated harvest of wildlife and fishery resources. Recognized as one
of the most persistent cause of biodiversity depletion, no attempts have been made to enforce
outdated legal provisions. Wildlife is openly sold as bush meat along major highways, in open
markets and offered in restaurants in major cities. In the rural areas, open access is the rule and
harvesting of all classes of wildlife occurs whether endangered or not. There are no recent
studies on bush meat in Nigeria, but in 1965/66, about 19% of food produced in the rural areas of
the Niger Delta came from wild game. Furthermore, about 20% of the mean annual protein
consumed is from wild game in the same period. Dependence on wild sources of protein is
linked historically to the incidence of tse-tse fly and the sleeping sickness, which made livestock
raising in the forest unprofitable. Efforts to promote game farming in the Delta are in their
nascent stages.
97.
Fisheries in the Niger Delta also suffer from being an open access resource. All inland
waters, lakes, ponds, streams and near shore estuaries are fished essentially without control.
Figures on fish production in the Delta are sparse and out-dated, with the most recent estimate of
535,435 tonnes dating back to 1983. By the year 2000 at a projected population of 140 million, it
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
38
was estimated that demand would be 2,035,000 tonnes at 14.49 kg per capita. Artisanal fisher
folk use canoes and fish in lagoons and brackish water, riverine and lacustrine habitats. In 197383, this group contributed up to 98% of landings. Now, increasing numbers of industrial fishing
trawlers have been licensed by federal authorities in Abuja, resulting in conflicts over fish
resources at the local level in the Delta. In spite of the pressure on the fisheries, regulations on
mesh size, age of fish, closed and open seasons are not enforced. Nigeria’s terrestrial wildlife and
rich aquatic and coastal/marine fisheries are essentially open access resources, with little to no
control over their use.
Invasive alien species.
98.
Two exotic invasive aquatic plant species have invaded the waters of the Niger delta. The
older of the two is Nypa fructicans. Nypa palm was introduced in 1906 for a variety of reasons
including coastal stabilization and food production. From the extreme eastern seaboard, it has
spread westwards and infested the mangrove ecosystem. Oil and gas activities, especially laying
of pipelines and seismic trails have opened once inaccessible swamplands to nypa invasion. So
also has the construction of transport channels. Water hyacinth, Eichinocloa crassipes has also
spread through the rivers, creeks, swamps and temporary water bodies of the delta. It forms a
huge mass whose effects range from displacement of native vegetation to suffocation of aquatic
biota.
LONG-TERM SOLUTION AND BARRIERS TO ACHIEVING THE SOLUTION
99.
The globally significant biological diversity of the Niger Delta has been significantly
degraded and continues to diminish due to a range of threats outlined in the previous chapter.
The long-term solution proposed by this project is to conserve and sustainably utilize the Niger
Delta’s globally significant biological diversity by mainstreaming biodiversity management
priorities into oil and gas sector development policies and operations in the Niger Delta.
100. There are two key aspects relevant to this solution. First, it will deal with a key driver of
environmental change in the Niger Delta through a ‘barrier-removal’ approach. The threat and
impact analysis in the previous chapter served to highlight which areas need attention.29 The
activities of the oil and gas industry rank very high in terms of impact, especially in the four oil
producing states of Akwa Ibom, Bayelsa, Delta and Rivers. Coupled with a solid analysis of
policies, legal and institutional frameworks, as well as a careful profiling and initial engagement
of the oil and gas industry, the project was able to establish the best entry points for the proposed
mainstreaming approach. The second aspect deals with the ability of leveraging finance. The
analysis showed that there is a major deficit in terms of biodiversity finance in the Niger Delta
region. This deficit is equally reflected in the very low capacity to manage biodiversity (at the
level of individuals, institutions, but also systemically). The process of generating finance for
improving the standards of biodiversity management in the Delta will certainly be a long one, but
29
The analysis of threats and impacts will need however to become much more geographically-based for guiding action in a
meaningful way.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
39
it must begin. In spite of the generally low ‘baseline’, the focus on the O&G sector places the
project optimally to kick-start this process of building capacity and generating finance. A new
and credible financial mechanism for biodiversity in the Niger Delta potentially will increase the
number of initiatives for dealing with the several threats to gloablly signficant biodiversity of the
Niger Delta.
101. This project is designed to provide incremental catalytic inputs funded by the Global
Environmental Facility and solid co-funding from Government and the O&G sector to
mainstream biological diversity management into the Oil and Gas sector and to do this by
empowering key stakeholders with better data and information, new scientific and regulatory
tools, strengthened capacity, new “best practice” methods, and a new funding mechanism and
platform for collaboration.
102. The project will enable stakeholders to improve significantly the standards for and
practices of biodiversity management both “inside the fence” and “outside the fence” of O&G
operations in the Niger Delta involving government and industry players, local communities and
NGOs to avoid, reduce and mitigate threats posed by O&G operations and proactively avoid
negative impacts and achieve positive impacts on the Delta’s biodiversity. This project is
designed to catalyze such change and foster collaboration by creating a new partnership platform
called the Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust.
103. However, several barriers are currently hampering the achievement of the long-term
solution. These can be summarised as follows:
Barrier #1: The governance framework of information, law, policy and institutional
capacity for mainstreaming biodiversity is hobbled by the “how to” gap.
104. Information on the nature, condition and extent of biodiversity across the vast Niger
Delta Region is fragmented and incomplete, a fact that significantly hampers decision-making. If
stakeholders are to mainstream biodiversity conservation objectives into oil and gas governance
and practice, they will need better access to decision support tools and information on the type,
condition, location and extent of biodiversity in the Delta. Currently, this information is largely
fragmented, outdated, off-line or non-existent. Data on biodiversity of the Delta is at best
unconsolidated, kept by a host of different government organizations and individual scientists
and O&G companies. At worst, there simply is no recent data on many key elements of the
Delta’s biological diversity (as highlighted in the context section earlier). Under existing
conditions, even if an O&G company in the Delta wants to learn more about biological diversity
in the vicinity of their operations or across the entire Delta, there is no place for them to be able
to access this information or even a substantial part of the information. Equally as important,
there is no place to share information gathered. This lack of transparency and insufficient
information hampers effective biodiversity-oriented decision-making across the industry.
105. Action Plan. Also hampering effective mainstreaming action is the lack of an overall
strategic vision of biodiversity conservation across the Delta, one of the world’s largest wetland
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
40
ecosystems, that includes: critical habitats; priority species and communities of species;
biodiversity hotspots around the Delta; O&G pressure “hot-spots”; existing forest reserves;
sacred sites for local communities; and so on. To be sure, some work has been done on these
issues, but once again, it is almost un-obtainable and therefore has almost no impact under
current conditions. For example, The Niger Delta Master Plan’s 200+ page Biodiversity Sector
Report does not exist in electronic form and is limited to a few printed copies on unknown
desktops and library shelves. Although the report contains a great deal of information, it too
suffers from the “how to” gap as it has minimal detail on how to conserve biological diversity in
the Delta in general or by mainstreaming into the O&G sector.
106. Biodiversity elements of law and policy framework. Overall, biological diversity or
biodiversity is an issue that has received scant attention in Nigeria. Other pressing priorities in
terms of resource use, employment generation, and economic development have tended to hold
sway. This is reflected in the legal and policy framework governing the O&G sector and even in
the laws and policies structuring the environmental sector of Nigeria. Even national attention to
biodiversity. Despite the paucity of biodiversity-specific provisions in Nigerian law and policy
environmental policies give minimal, existing relevant laws and policies do contain enough
“biodiversity-friendly” provisions that would allow for and support the development biodiversity
mainstreaming programs and capacity. The absence of policy guidance on “how” to do this is the
immediate barrier that stops forward progress on this issue.
107. For example, The National Policy on Environment calls for “restoring, maintaining and
enhancing the ecosystems and ecological processes essential for the functioning of the
biosphere…” but there are no practical regulations to operationalize this lofty and worthy
objective. Overall, there is an inadequate level of understanding of just what biodiversity is and
how to begin building and using tools to conserve and sustainably utilize it.
108. Legal and policy instruments for regulating the O&G industry provide inadequate
strategic guidance in terms of minimizing impacts on biodiversity from the O&G project cycle.
Biodiversity standards and management objectives are not clear in the EIA guidelines to date: the
“E” in the EIA should incorporate the “B” in biodiversity. Currently, it does not.
109. The very important EIA process in Nigeria currently is not supported by an
understanding of how to assess impact of a project on biodiversity. For example, O&G typically
can have two types of impacts on biodiversity – primary and secondary. An example of a
primary impact would be the direct mortality of a primate caused by the felling of a tree to make
way for a pipeline. Secondary impacts from this same action would be the hunting of hundreds
of other primates caused by the pipeline road, which for the first time, allowed bush meat hunters
to access the impenetrable forest. There are innumerable other examples of this: the EIA process
as currently structured does not consider this adequately.
110. Additionally, the existing EIA Act and associated guidelines provide only a weak link
between the EIA process and the different phases of an O&G project lifecycle. For
mainstreaming biodiversity, this link is critical as each stage of the O&G lifecycle has different
potential impacts on biodiversity and different potential benefits for biodiversity management.
To ensure any regulations actually achieve the intended results, accountability must be
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
41
adequately built in to the process. Existing EIA regulations fail to ensure accountability by not
requiring post intervention inspections or the monitoring of project progress, leaving no way to
assess the success or failure of the remediation measures called for in the approved EIA.
111. The low level of transparency in the EIA process is also a barrier to improved
biodiversity mainstreaming. Past EIAs are not easily available to the public and the process does
not make provisions for sufficient public participation and input. The EIA Act provides for a 21day public display of the EIA report for stakeholders’ review and input regarding its content. But
these and other measures related to accessibility of information for review and comment are
followed minimally and in practice do little to enhance the transparency of the EIA process,
because the methods of putting an EIA report on public display are old-fashioned. Printed copies
are made available to read in person at the corresponding office, rather than simply putting them
online, making it very difficult for civil society to access them effectively.
112. The existing policy framework of O&G and environment as described in the Table 5
above does not address such critical biodiversity issues as scientific capacity, capacity building,
financial resources, intellectual property, and access and benefit sharing. Critical principles such
as the precautionary principle, inter/intra-generational equity, and liability for environmental
damage are not incorporated explicitly as part of the policy framework for biodiversity
conservation and natural resources management. Biodiversity obligations are not translated into
concrete policy with management measures that can be readily understood and action undertaken
in specific contexts.
113. The Environmental Guidelines and Standards for the Petroleum Industry in Nigeria
(EGASPIN), issued by the DPR and last revised in 200230, focus on the control of pollutants
from O&G operations. They do not cover to any degree the biological diversity of the Delta and
how to control/mitigate/prevent and offset impacts of the O&G operations on the Delta’s
biological diversity. The Petroleum Regulations of 1969 are the source of law governing
compensation for damage from O&G activities and governing restoration of areas degraded.
There are a number of provisions guiding compensation and restoration that fail completely to
value biodiversity and to specify compensation to appropriate funds to enable restoration and
conservation work when appropriate.
114. Capacity of lead institutions. Under the PPG process, stakeholder interviews touching
upon capacity issues revealed a virtual absence of any capacity related to biodiversity in the
organizations responsible for reviewing EIAs at the Federal and State levels. No training needs
assessment has ever been conducted with respect to biodiversity mainstreaming into the O&G
sector. A preliminary assessment conducted under the PPG found nearly every relevant Federal
and State agency (in particular FMoE, MND, DPR and SMoE) to be under-trained to understand
what biodiversity is, much less how to mainstream biodiversity management objectives into the
O&G industry, including policies, the EIA process, and due diligence (i.e. screening, scoping,
reviewing studies, making decision, monitoring and auditing), as well as enforcement. The latter
function could e.g. benefit from a much stronger involvement of the state and local governments,
as well as academic capacity in various Delta states in areas related to biodiversity. There are
few if any biodiversity champions within any of the leading government organizations engaged
30
A new revision is underway as of October 2010 but no information is available on this.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
42
in the O&G sector and there is little cross-pollination among these organizations in relevant
environmental issues. Scholarships programs do exist to support higher education for Nigerians
in O&G related areas: biodiversity and even environment in general is not yet one of those areas
for which scholarships may be obtained. And finally, even if government organizations wanted
to strengthen the capacity of their staff in biodiversity areas, there are no readily available
training modules customized for the Niger Delta that would enable them to do that efficiently
and effectively.
Barrier #2: From the O&G industry’s point of view, biodiveristy mainstreaming measures
need to be guided by an adequate ‘framework’ for action through which key stakeholder
can build trust in each other, agree on common objectives and progress towards them in a
cost-effective way. Currently, this framework in either non-existant or very incipient.
115. The lack of an adequate neutral engagement platform that provides a shared strategic
basis for the key actors to come together to engage in proactive, collaborate biodiversity
management in the Niger Delta is a key impedement e.g. for a more effective industry
engagement in biodiversity mainstreaming. At the global corporate level, all of the international
O&G companies operating in joint ventures with NNPC in the Niger Delta show some
commitment to biodiversity conservation. This provides a solid policy basis for developing their
commitments to biodiversity in the Niger Delta. However, the O&G industry in the Delta suffers
from the same “what” versus “how” gap that affects the governance framework for O&G in
Nigeria. For example, although many companies espouse a commitment to biodiversity in their
global corporate policy documents (i.e. the “what”), the understanding and manifestation of
“how” this is actually done on the ground in the Delta varies widely and fails to learn from and
build upon international best practice in biodiversity action planning.31 There is little
understanding among the O&G companies surveyed of answers to questions such as “What is a
biodiversity action plan (BAP)? Why have a BAP? How to prepare and implement a BAP in a
place like the Delta? How are results/targets specified and measured under a BAP? How can
stakeholders be engaged more meaningfully and proactively in the BAP process? What are other
companies’ best practices in the Delta? Why are independent reviews critical to BAP
effectiveness, value and success?
116. An inadequate level of uptake of international best practice on the part of the O&G
industry in the Niger Delta and a low level of accountability for results (positive and negative) in
biodiversity actions have undermined the O&G sector’s ability to mainstream biodiversity
management objectives inside the fence and outside the fence, likely reducing benefits to the
companies themselves, to local communities, and to the Delta’s globally significant biological
diversity. A key barrier to improving practices is the lack of scrutiny and exposure: existing
biodiversity-related work is not subject to independent review and comparison to international
best practice. There is also a lack of understanding of the costs and benefits of establishing and
complying with higher biodiversity standards. Such costs and benefits would be highlighted
through a biodiversity action planning process for the company both “inside the fence” and
“outside the fence.”
31
See: http://www.ipieca.org/system/files/publications/baps.pdf.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
43
Barrier #3: Financing for improved management of biodiversity in the Niger Delta is
inadequate, inefficiently disbursed, and not linked sufficiently to priority biodiversity
areas, O&G operations or communities around the Delta.
117. The Niger Delta has a long history of oil and gas exploration and operations dating back
to the early 1900s. It is a place with a history of complex social, economic, and political
challenges. More than 6 major international O&G operators operate in the Delta with many
more Nigerian and other smaller international companies active as well. There is no doubt that
the presence of this industry in the Delta generates significant finance. Yet, a neglegible fraction
of it is reverting back to improving biodiversity management, in spite of the known negative
impacts of the activity on biodiversity.
118. Another critical barrier is the lack of a strategic basis and/or mechanism for engaging
local communities in the biodiversity mainstreaming management process (and mainstreaming
biodiversity management objectives into O&G operations). Current practice has the O&G
companies formulating disparate MoU with local communities across the Delta, but in the
absence of a link to a corporate BAP for Niger Delta operations and a Niger Delta Action Plan
mainstreaming actions are highly ineffective and at best ad hoc.
119. One of the key barriers to mainstreaming biodiversity management objectives into the Oil
and Gas sector in this context is the lack of a neutral, trusted financial mechanism to facilitate
community-based biodiversity conservation and sustainable use outside the fence.
120. There are different dimensions to mainstreaming biodiversity into the Oil and Gas Sector
in the unique context that is the Niger Delta. O&G operations of course affect biodiversity
“inside the fence” (See Box 1 for explanation of inside and outside the fence). But they also
affect biodiversity “outside the fence” in the broader social and environmental context. In this
context, mainstreaming is not a one-dimensional concept. Rather it has at least three dimensions
and perhaps more, as Figure 4 illustrates.
Figure 4: The three dimensions to mainstreaming biodiversity into the O&G sector in the Niger Delta.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
44
121. The regulatory dimension. In this dimension, successful mainstreaming means that
relevant laws, policies and regulations and existing body of supporting information and data are
modified by government to more effectively require, encourage or enable specific mainstreaming
kinds of work. In this project, the EIA process is a prime example of this. Systemic capacity for
mainstreaming is another one.
122. The O&G operations dimension. In this dimension, successful mainstreaming means that
O&G companies themselves modify and/or improve their practices so that biodiversity is more
effectively considered “inside the fence” during all stages of the O&G project lifecycle and
“outside the fence” because O&G operations do not exist in a vacuum. With respect to the
effective engagement of the O&G industry, the companies’ own and collective action on
mainstreaming is the focus on the project’s model BAP work, coupled with community
engagement demonstrations, and the like.
123. The community dimension. In this dimension, mainstreaming can only be successful if it
engages local people and their central role in biodiversity use and management in the Niger
Delta. These three dimensions require an integrated, collaborative approach to mainstreaming
that does not currently exist in the O&G sector of the Niger Delta.
BASELINE ANALYSIS
124. Outcome 1 Baseline: Governance frameworks for mainstreaming. The Government of
Nigeria has committed to strengthening the law and policy framework for the O&G sector.
However in a baseline situation, the MoE will be unable to develop and apply an action plan for
expanding and improving the effectiveness of biodiversity conservation in the Delta. To date, no
gap analysis has been done at a Delta level of the “coverage” provided by the existing thirtyeight forest reserves and game sanctuaries in the Delta, encompassing some 1,977 km 2. See the
GEF4 SO2 Tracking Tool in Annex 6 for list of these areas.
125. In the baseline scenario, the mainstreaming of biodiversity into the O&G sector policies
and practices (hereafter referred to as “mainstreaming”) will be hampered by inadequate access
to sufficient data and information on biological diversity as well as decision support tools to
complement such information. In the baseline situation, the international IBAT program will
maintain its ability to provide some information on the Niger Delta, but with many gaps,
reducing its usefulness to O&G companies operating in the Delta to almost nil. PPG interveiws
with O&G companies revealed that the existing IBAT holds little useful information to
companies in their day-to-day work in the Delta. In the baseline scenario, IBAT will continue to
be limited to the taxa covered by the IUCN Red List or the protected areas listed in the World
Database on Protected Areas; it will continue to be inaccurate in terms of its geographic
referencing, and at a scale that limits its usefulness. In the baseline scenario, O&G companies
active in the Delta will continue to gather data and information on the Delta, but lack a common
platform to share and exchange this information in order to build up a larger data set that could
benefit all players in the sector. In the baseline situation, a great deal of information and data will
remain on institutional hard-drives or in paper files.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
45
126. For example, a study32 commissioned by the Nigerian Government identified sites of
conservation interest and recommendations for their sustainable use in specific local government
areas of the Niger Delta. The Biodiversity Unit within the Institute of Pollution Studies, Rivers
State University of Science and Technology completed and published the study. Even though the
study provided useful information and enhanced knowledge of the subject matter, its
recommendations were not directly implemented. Institutional changes within government
resulted in no follow-up on the study. The study’s findings and recommendations are still
relevant to any biodiversity action planning exercise today, almost 20 years later. In the baseline
situation, the existing body of information and work will remain under-utilized for
mainstreaming.
127. In the baseline scenario, mainstreaming will be hampered by the lack of any overall
strategic view of biodiversity across the Niger Delta, one of the world’s largest wetland
ecosystems. Without a more robust elucidation of priority habitats, species, plant and animal
communities, sacred sites, high-pressure areas for O&G, mainstreaming actions will be vague,
disparate and ad-hoc, with limited ability to measure success on any higher strategic levels. In
the baseline situation, the gap between the “what” and the “how” will continue to characterize
biodiversity conservation in the Delta. For example, the foundation of the Niger Delta Regional
Development Master Plan is an integrated approach to sustainable development, with “the
natural environment” being one of the four main themes in addition to twelve overall goals,
among them being: “To ensure sustainable use and conservation of land, forest, wildlife,
fisheries and water resources” and “To incorporate environmental considerations into all
policies and programmes of the Niger Delta”. In this respect, the “what” to do is addressed
overall. However, “how” to do this both technically and mechanistically are questions left open
for innovation.
128. In the baseline scenario, Nigeria’s O&G laws and policies will continue to evolve and be
improved, but likely without the needed focus on biodiversity. In particular, the analysis has
pointed out to a number of gaps in terms of enforcing these laws, which is linked to the issue of
systemic capacity for the management of biodiversity.
129. In the baseline situation, the existing EIA process in Nigeria discounts or down-plays
biodiversity largely because there is so little capacity in biodiversity areas of expertise in
Nigeria. There are few experts who know how to adequately incorporate biodiversity concerns
into the EIA process. For example, often the same expert who is dealing with the noise impacts
of a project is also dealing with biodiversity. Biodiversity is still a new concept in Nigeria and
this newness also is manifested in the inadequate attention paid to biodiversity through the EIA
process.
130. In the baseline scenario biodiversity mainstreaming into the O&G regulatory framework
will be non-existent, hampered by a lack of understanding by regulators and companies alike on
how to mainstream biodiversity management into regulatory tools such as the EIA, O&G
guidelines and oil spill contingency planning. Most O&G laws in Nigeria have focused on
32
Powell. C.B. 1993. Sites and Species of Conservation Interest in the Central Axis of the Niger Delta (Yenagoa, Sagbama,
Ekeremor, and Southern Ijo LGAs): A Report and Recommendations to the Natural Resources Conservation Council
(NARESCON).
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
46
organizing and governing oil exploration and production and had incidental provisions to meet
immediate problems of disturbance to human health largely, and some form of compensation for
damage to buildings, profitable trees or crops, and loss in value of land or interests in land. The
majority of them have not been concerned with long-term integrated environmental planning and
protection. At the Federal law and policy level, there has been no programme or effort to
streamline conservation of biological diversity into the oil and gas sector. The regulator role
given to Federal organizations has yet to translate into clear steps and guidelines for
mainstreaming.
131. In the baseline scenario, biodiversity has been almost totally absent from the law and
policy framework of the O&G sector. Signs of improvement will emerge periodically like the
Edo State Law on Biodiversity, which was passed in recent years. But without encouragement
and sharing of information across the States, this will likely continue to be the exception rather
than the norm. Mainstreaming will also be slowed by an outdated approach that limits
environmental thinking and action to pollution and does not go beyond pollution to the many
other biodiversity-related issues facing the O&G sector in the Niger Delta.
132. To be sure, there are some glimmers of hope in the regulatory O&G framework from a
biodiversity perspective. As profiled in Table 5, the new Petroleum Industry Bill will help to
modernize and consolidate Nigeria’s oil and gas legislation and there are some improvements on
the environmental side. For example, the law will require that where called for, restoration must
actually take place rather than simply compensating someone for the damage and not taking any
remediation efforts on the ground. But to make new provisions like this work, biodiversity will
have to be adequately valued and often, biodiversity is undervalued. This was evidenced by a
practical exercise on biodiversity valuation carried out a few years ago with the support of the
Nigerian NGO Bioresources Development and Conservation Programme (BDCP). The focus
was on compensation claims for damages in connection with O&G operations in the Niger Delta
and it showed that there is much more than loss of crops and fish resources to be taken into
account in cases of compensation. There is however a need for localised ‘options assessments &
solutions’, if biodiversity values are to be effectively mainstreamed in the process.
133. Biodiversity is a little known and often neglected concept in most government circles in
Nigeria. In the baseline scenario mainstreaming will be severely hampered by a low level of
capacity to: a) understand what biodiversity is and why it is important and; b) second to
understand in practical terms how to mainstream biodiversity into daily work. In the baseline
scenario, almost no training will be available to government and community members on
biodiversity in the Delta States.
134. Capacity building is a priority overall in Nigeria and the Nigerian government has created
a number of funds and training programs to help young Nigerians enter the various technical
fields supporting O&G work. In the baseline scenario, the Petroleum Technology Development
Fund (PTDF) will continue to fund scholarships for University study in fields relevant to the
development of the O&G industry in Nigeria. But such scholarship programs likely will continue
to exclude biodiversity and environmental fields and degrees. The PTDF also funds university
research and endowments, however none of its research or scholarships funds have yet gone to
help Nigerians better understand and manage the Niger Delta’s unique biological diversity.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
47
135. Outcome 2 Baseline: Industry engagement. At the global corporate level, all of the
international O&G companies operating in joint ventures with NNPC in the Niger Delta show
some commitment to biodiversity conservation. Further, there is a general recognition that the
biodiversity guidance provided by the IPIECA33 is the industry standard to which they should
adhere as a minimum. In particular, reference in some O&G corporate policies is made to the
IPIECA guidance on developing Biodiversity Action Plans. The NNPC, the major shareholder of
all O&G operations in the Niger Delta, does not have an explicit biodiversity policy or
commitment. However, its stated commitment to a ‘Green Environment’ (though focused on
carbon emissions) does provide a basis for the company to develop its position and actions with
regard to biodiversity. In a baseline situation, the basic corporate policies of the O&G companies
operating in Delta provide a solid policy basis for developing their commitments to biodiversity
in the Niger Delta.
136. However, in the baseline situation, the O&G companies will continue to face the same
“How to” hurdle with respect to mainstreaming biodiversity into their Delta operations as
Nigeria’s government faces in mainstreaming biodiversity objectives into the laws and policies
governing the sector. O&G company engagement with the Delta’s biological diversity and local
communities is still evolving and improving in the Delta.
137. Under the baseline situation, operational management capacities for O&G will remain
under-developed and inadequate to the task of mainstreaming biodiversity both inside and
outside “the fence” of O&G operations. To date, O&G efforts have not integrated international
best practice for mainstreaming biodiversity into their operations. Instead, O&G efforts have
tended to keep their biodiversity work at an arms length away from their operations as part of
their corporate giving to local communities. This traditional path separates “nature” related
projects and “development” related projects when working with local communities. The efforts
have resulted in disparate and somewhat ad hoc contributions to worthy projects rather than a
strategic effort to mainstream biodiversity into their operations and overall footprint across the
Delta.
138. Though there is action on the part of some of the international companies at the local
level in the Niger Delta, there is clearly much more that could be done. Why there is so little
biodiversity action on the ground is probably due to a number of factors, including the legacy of
O&G licenses to operate, which goes back decades, long before biodiversity was on the agenda.
Further, biodiversity action has generally focused on traditional conservation projects, and thus
can be seen to compete for attention against more pressing community development needs.
139. In the baseline scenario, the challenges facing any initiative aiming to mainstream
biodiversity into the O&G sector in the Niger Delta are significant. The perception of
biodiversity as an environmental issue and not as a social issue or sustainable development issue
has meant that it has had to compete with other pressing social development issues. In addition,
to mainstream biodiversity into O&G operations “outside the fence” will require partners – O&G
companies cannot do it alone. This means proactive strategic, results-based collaboration with
local communities, state governments and federal agencies. To date, this has only partially
occurred in ways that are not linked to O&G mainstreaming efforts.
33
See: http://www.ipieca.org/focus-area/biodiversity.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
48
140. In the baseline situation, communities will continue to be the primary stakeholder with
respect to local control and access to biodiversity and other non-O&G resources throughout the
Delta. Beneath the modern context of natural resource management in Nigeria is a traditional
one. In the baseline scenario, these traditional rights and obligations will continue but will not be
utilized to their full potential in any mainstreaming efforts.
141. Nonetheless, there are significant opportunities for biodiversity embedded in the
structural set up of the O&G sector in the Niger Delta. Building off of the well-established joint
venture model for upstream operations in the region, a biodiversity partnership programme could
be initiated. Such a programme could benefit from both the leadership of the NNPC with respect
to the responsible management of the country’s O&G reserves and from the biodiversity
commitments and experiences of NNPC’s international joint venture partners.
142. In short, within the O&G sector there is the potential commitment and capacity to
establish a substantive Niger Delta biodiversity partnership initiative that would mainstream by
contributing to both biodiversity and sustainable social development in the region. In the baseline
situation, there will be no catalytic effort to create such a partnership.
143. Outcome 3 Baseline: Funding for Biodiversity Conservation in Niger Delta. Little
funding has been committed to the conservation of the Niger Delta’s biodiversity. In the
baseline, a paradoxical situation of cronic underfunding of biodiversity management will persist
in the context of a region (the Delta) and a sector (oil and gas) that generates tens of billions
US$/year.
144. Government Funding. Most biodiversity projects in Niger Delta are funded through
national and state government budgetary allocations, bilateral and multilateral aid and from some
oil companies operating in the region.
145. Table 6 shows the summary of funds allocated to biodiversity related projects in Nigeria
and the Delta across two ministries and the four pilot Delta states. Federal funds for biodiversity
conservation in Niger Delta come from FMoE and MND. Funds are also allocated by the SMoE
in Delta, Bayelsa, Rivers and Akwa Ibom States, but as the table shows, to date they have been
very minimal.
146. In 2006 FMoE allocated $3,859,062 for forestry development work nation-wide: no
funds were allocated for work in the Niger Delta in 2006-2008. In 2009, approximately $150,000
was earmarked for “Natural resources conservation and development of management plans for
wetlands” in the Niger Delta. An additional $66,400 was allocated to endangered aquatic species
conservation and management and to conservation of coastal ecosystem in the Guinea Current
large marine ecosystem. The $60,000 allocated in 2009 by MND was for the purpose of
rehabilitating “degraded ecosystems in Rivers and Bayelsa States.”
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
49
Table 6: Federal and State budgetary allocations for biodiversity conservation related projects (US$)
Ministry (Federal and States)
FMoE
MND
Delta SMoE
Rivers SMoE; Bayelsa SMoE
Akwa Ibom SmoE*
Total:
Total Average 2006-2009
Amount approved/appropriation for biodiversity related project in the Niger Delta
2006-2008
2009
0
215,733
60,844
55,631
33,333
33,333
33,333
365,541
99,718/year
Source: Federal Budget Office and respective ministries in the States
Note: * Of the 2006 allocation, $13,333 was eventually used while the 2007 and 2009 funds were not released.
147. At the State level, funding for biodiversity conservation in the Niger Delta varies from
zero to small sums of $30,000-55,000. Even though there are a number State-level PA in the four
pilot Delta States, they have no infrastructure, no management plans, no budgetary allocations,
no staff deployed to manage them, and no enforcement. They are in effect “paper parks.”
148. NGO funded or implemented biodiversity related projects in the Niger Delta. The
funding for biodiversity related projects by major NGO’s working in the Niger Delta was also
surveyed during the PPG. The key NGO players include: Living Earth Nigeria Foundation
(LENF), Nigeria Conservation Foundation (NCF), Pronatura Nigeria. Between 1998 and 2006, it
was only Living Earth Foundation that had several projects on biodiversity in Niger Delta funded
from various sources. Although the survey was non-exhastive, Table 7 summarizes the key
projects, sources of funding and amount for LENF.
Table 7: Biodiversity related projects implemented by NGOs in the Niger Delta
NGO
LENF
Project Name
Community Based Management of
Tropical Forests in Cross River State.
Living Earth environment action
programme
Cross River Environment (CRE)
Project
Promoting Sustainable Livelihoods
Capacity Building for Community –
based Land and Water Management
ProNatura
Nigeria
NCF
Elephant Survey
Biodiversity Action Plan for Gele-Gele
Location & Funder
Cross Rivers State European
Union and DFID
Cost in US$
Duration
21,953
1998- 2002
Bayelsa State; SPDC
629,571
1998 – 2002
118,064
2002 – 2006
603,143
2004- 2006
27,297
2002
50,000
2002
873,333
$2,323,361
$193,613/yr
2005-9
1998-2009
1998 - 2009
Cross River State Canada Int’l
Development Agency
Bayelsa State; DFID and
SPDC
Cross River State Int’l
Development Research Centre
Akassa Okoroba and Andoni;
MacArthur Foundation
Gele-Gele community; SPDC
Total funding
Average yearly funding for all surveyed NGOs
149. O&G Operators’ Funding for Biodiversity Conservation in Niger Delta. Other sources of
funding for biodiversity conservation related projects are from some oil companies operating in
the region. For example, in 2006, the Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria Limited
(SPDC) worked with local groups, government, forest communities, other energy companies and
NGOs to develop biodiversity action plans to conserve two forest reserves: Gele-Gele and
Urhonigbe in Edo State. Gele-Gele covers 363 km2 with a range of habitats from freshwater
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
50
swamp forest to tropical rain forest, while the Urhonigbe reserve covers 308 km2. Also, in 2007
SPDC worked with 33 communities in the reserves to establish community-based forest
management institutions. Between 2008 and 2009, these communities replanted more than 100
ha of the degraded Urhonigbe reserve.
150. The Ecological Fund (EF). The Federal Government established the Ecological Fund to
address the environmental and land degradation problems affecting communities across the
country. As an intervention fund, it comes from the first line charge of the Federation Account
and is not appropriated by the National Assembly. Rather 2% of the Federation Account is
automatically transferred into the Fund each year. The power to disburse the funds is vested in
the President.
151. Headed by the Minister of Environment, the inter-ministerial National Committee on
Ecological Problems (NCEP) advises the President on the management of the EF and
disbursement of its funds. The NCEP has four (4) technical sub-committees covering the four
main areas of emphasis under the Fund: i) Erosion; ii) Desertification; iii) General environmental
pollution, and; iv) Oil spillage and pollution. These sub-committees examine designated
ecological problems, propose remedial measures and make recommendations for the
consideration of NCEP. State governments are also allocated some EF resources for projects in
their States. EF funds have been used traditionally to ameliorate environmental problems such as
drought, desertification, oil pollution, landslides, and inadequate solid waste management.
152. Presently, the EF is funding over 200 projects nationwide, including a national
afforestation programme, remediation of oil impacted sites, erosion control, shoreline protection
and reclamation, provision of medical waste incinerators, integrated municipal solid waste
management in seven cities, procurement and installation of multipurpose plastic recycling
machines in 26 cities nationwide and provision of oil spill response equipment, GIS and
laboratory equipment. Detailed information on amounts and where the funds are spent is not
available.
153. In the baseline scenario, O&G company support for ad hoc biodiversity work will
continue to be important. In the baseline situation, very little if any Government budgetary
resources will be allocated to biodiversity work in the Delta, either at the Federal level or by any
one of the four States. If the two annual averages from Table 6 and Table 7 are added together,
they equal the sum of 293,331/year. This sum is highly inadequate when compared to the
estimates of “minimum-effective” levels of financing needed to adequately conserve biological
diversity in the Niger Delta. Blom (2004) estimated a range of US$1,541,000 - 5,628,000
annually recurrent expenditures for minimum-to-modest management of up to 16,800 km2 in the
Niger Delta.34 Conservatively, this represents a shortfall of at least some $ 1.2 - 5.0 million/year,
and likely larger ($5-10 million/year) if improved approaches to conservation are considered in
the wider Niger Delta Region such as mainstreaming and non-traditional community-based
management of sacred sites.
Bloom 2004: An estimate of the costs of an effective system of protected areas in the Niger Delta – Congo Basin Forest
Region. Biodiv Conserv 13: 2661-2678. The area of 16,800 km2 is referred to as additional to existing areas under management
and more likely through a gazettal approach. The author questions however the viability of a gazettal approach in the Niger Delta,
given the high population density pressure.
34
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
51
PART II: Strategy
PROJECT RATIONALE AND POLICY CONFORMITY
Fit with the GEF Focal Area Strategy and Strategic Programme
154. This project is aligned with the GEF’s Strategic Objective #2 for Biodiversity
(Mainstreaming Biodiversity in Production Landscapes/Seascapes and Sectors) and, within it, the
Strategic Programme #4 (Strengthening the Policy & Regulatory Framework for Mainstreaming
Biodiversity). In doing so the project will target Nigeria’s oil and gas sector, which is the
backbone of Nigeria’s economy, and touch upon the sector’s interface with biodiversity. This is
especially relevant, as the bulk of Nigeria’s O&G resources are found in the biodiversity rich
Niger Delta Region.
155. Through the chosen mainstreaming approach, the project will deal with the key threats to
biodiversity in the Niger Delta, which include pollution, habitat change and degradation that are
linked to the overall footprint of the O&G sector in the Niger Delta (i.e. ‘inside the fence’). It
will do so by bringing about change in the underlying drivers, which are the governance
framework of the O&G sector and the ability of the O&G industry local communities and
government to engage in productive collaboration.
156. The project’s approach, which includes the establishing of a new funding mechanism (the
Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust), will also allow stakeholders to deal with other threats that are
not directly linked to the immediate footprint of the O&G industry (hence ‘outside the fence’).
Through projects that will be approved for funding by the Trust the underlying drivers of
biodiversity loss for these other threats will also be addressed. These threats may include land
clearings for agriculture, overharvesting of biological resources and invasive alien species.
157. The O&G industry has demonstrated a high level of engagement in the project through
the Oil Producers Trader Sector (OPTS), which is part of the Lagos Chamber of Commerce. The
OPTS Sub-Committee on Environment and Safety met on 14 Dec 2010, when nearly all industry
members reiterated their support to the project, in particular Outcomes 2 and 3.
158. The project is also an integral part of the GEF’s Strategic Programme for West Africa,
“SPWA”, Sub-Component Biodiversity, and it concerns the Programe’s overarching Objective
#2 ‘Mainstreaming biodiversity in production landscapes and sectors’. Emphasis is placed on
producing tangible results on the ground, thus more than two thirds of the GEF finance are going
to Outcomes 1 and 3, which are respectively focused on stakeholder capacity for governing the
O&G sector in the Niger Delta towards improved management of biodiversity and on the
establishment of a funding mechanism for disseminating improved practices of biodiversity
management at the local level.
159. More specifically, the project will contribute to the achievement of GEF’s outcome
indicators under the strategic programming areas as follows:
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
52
Table 8: Summary of the project’s contribution to focal area objectives and indicators
GEF-4 BD Strategic
programmes
SP4 - Strengthening
the Policy &
Regulatory
Framework for
Mainstreaming
Biodiversity
Expected
impact
Conservation
and
sustainable use
of
biodiversity
incorporated in
the
productive
landscape
and seascape
GEF-4 BD
Indicators
Number of
Hectares/production
systems under
certified production
practices that meet
sustainability and
biodiversity
standards
Project contribution to indicators
Direct: Improved management of 600 km2 (“inside the
fence” or direct mainstreaming target) of O&G
operations as measured by adoption of Biodiversity
Action Plans for a target number of O&G operations in
the Delta.
Indirect: Threats to biodiversity linked to O&G are
reduced in a spatial area of 46,420 km2 (“outside the
fence or indirect mainstreaming target) as measured by
condition, number or extent of key species and
ecosystems in the Niger Delta:
- Area in ND where Niger Delta red colobus monkey is
confirmed
- # of hectares of mangrove ecosystem in under
improved special management regime
- # of hectares cover of barrier island lowland forest
under protection.
Rationale and summary of GEF Alternative
160. There is a promising, although low baseline of governance, O&G company engagement,
and to a lesser extent funding upon which to build. However, in the baseline scenario in the
absence of GEF funding, the Niger Delta’s globally significant biodiversity will continue to
degrade in many places and lost in others due in part to 50+ years of oil and gas development
with little to no attention paid to the conservation of biological diversity.
161. In the baseline scenario, the existing regulatory framework will continue to neglect the
Delta’s biological diversity and key institutions will continue to have virtually no capacity in
biodiversity-related issues. In the baseline scenario, O&G companies will continue to be
amenable to the concept of biodiversity mainstreaming, but will approach the issue in disparate,
ad hoc, inefficient ways that yield minimal results for biodiversity and local communities. To be
sure, there are signs of tide shifting with new laws and increasing awareness of the Delta’s
unique biodiversity. These changes are however small and mere “ripples” on the surface of the
Niger Delta, one of the world’s largest wetland areas. In the baseline situation, funding for
biodiversity conservation in the Delta will continue to be inadequate at a level of US$ 1 million –
US$5 million/year.
162. In the GEF alternative, the project is designed to serve as the catalyst for this changing
tide by through a strategic engagement mechanisms that works with O&G companies to adopt a
new common BAP framework and commit to biodiversity action planning “inside the fence,”
and catalyzes new partnership platform called the Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust that brings
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
53
together local communities, the O&G sector and government for improved biodiversity
mainstreaming “outside the fence.”
PROJECT GOAL, OBJECTIVE, OUTCOMES AND OUTPUTS/ACTIVITIES
The project’s goal is to contribute to the conservation and sustainable use of globally significant
biological diversity in the Niger Delta.
The project objective is to mainstream biodiversity management priorities into the Niger Delta
oil and gas (O&G) sector development policies and operations.
In order to achieve the above objective, and based on a barrier analysis (see Section I, Part I),
which identified: (i) the problem being addressed by the project; (ii) its root causes; and (iii) the
barriers that need to overcome to actually address the problem and its root causes, the project’s
intervention has been organised under three outcomes in line with the three components
presented at PIF stage:
Outcome 1: The governance framework of law, policy, and institutional capacity to enable
the mainstreaming of biodiversity management into the O&G sector in the Niger Delta is
strengthened.
Outcome 2: Government, the O&G industry and local communities build and pilot new
biodiversity action planning tools for the proactive biodiversity management in the Niger
Delta.
Outcome 3: Stakeholders support long-term biodiversity management in the Niger Delta
by capitalizing and accessing the Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust as a collaborative
engagement mechanism for local communities, O&G companies and Government at its
core.
Outcome 1: The governance framework of law, policy, and institutional capacity to enable
the mainstreaming of biodiversity management into the O&G sector in the Niger Delta is
strengthened.
The outputs necessary to achieve this outcome are described below.
Output 1.1 IBAT for the Niger Delta is in place and operational.
Activity 1: Strengthen IBAT application for the Niger Delta (ND).
In order to mainstream biodiversity into the O&G sector of the Niger Delta, decision
makers must have access to sufficient data and information about the Delta’s biodiversity
from credible sources and ideally through a mechanism by which this data could be
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
54
updated and adhere to a certain standard of quality. As a cornerstone for making existing
data on biodiversity of the Niger Delta more available to support decision making in the
O&G sector of the Niger Delta, the project will work with existing data and information
partners to the IBAT platform to improve the quality and breadth of data on the ND’s
biodiversity available through the IBAT platform.
To do this, project resources will establish a Niger Delta IBAT Working Group comprised
of relevant Nigerian and international NGOs (e.g. NCF, UNEP/WCMC, BirdLife
International, IUCN, Wetland International, Conservation International), O&G companies
operating in the Delta, and Nigerian Government representatives. The Niger Delta IBAT
Working Group (WG) will be tasked with elaborating and implementing a program to
make the IBAT platform for the Niger Delta more useful to its primary users and to a wider
range of users such as the ND Biodiversity Trust project applicants or implementers.
Through a “user-driven”, needs-based process, the WG will assess the shortfalls in the level
of decision support that the IBAT platform is currently able to provide. This process will
identify data and information gaps, including the amount and type of Niger Delta data that
may be “in preparation” already by IBAT information partners, and identify clear gaps that
need to be filled using other sources of data and information in paper files and institutional
hard-drives in Nigeria and elsewhere. There will also be data that needs to be generated
through new field surveys to confirm presence/absence, distribution, and to digitize
geographic boundaries or specially-managed areas within the Delta (forest reserves, sacred
sites), and so on.
IBAT includes known, formerly designated areas such as national protected areas or key
biodiversity areas (KBA). The only KBAs identified in the ND through IBAT are based
upon birds. Work under this activity will focus on expanding the coverage of taxonomic
groups. GEF and partner co-financing investments will support work to identify important
sites for mammals, fish, amphibians, and invertebrates.
Activity 2: Develop a Nigerian-based, Niger Delta specific portal linked to IBAT that will
provide more detailed layers of information. IBAT is an early screening tool that is not
designed to provide overly detailed information on location of biodiversity, and other
parameters that would help inform O&G decision making a more local level. Work under
this activity will build upon Activity 1 to establish at least 3 more detailed layers of
information and data on the Delta that would help to inform biodiversity mainstreaming
decisions. Such layers could include habitat maps with presence/absence data for specific
species such the ND red colobus, chimpanzees, and the Andoni elephants.
Participatory Mapping. This Niger Delta specific portal also presents opportunities for
piloting new and innovative participatory mapping work with local communities. The
IBAT WG will select a biodiversity-rich region of the Delta and work with local
communities in the to-be-determined area. In doing so, local community members will be
trained in the use of hand-held GPS units to obtain community-specific information on
priority resource use areas, sacred sites, and other to-be-agreed upon data parameters. This
approach will enable local communities to input their priority information directly into the
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
55
mainstreaming process and provide O&G companies with a cost-effective way to assess
community priorities in the mainstreaming process.
This activity will also focus on strengthening capacity to curate biodiversity data on the
Niger Delta within Nigeria to enable the long-term maintenance and sustainability of data
sets on the Niger Delta in Nigeria.
Output 1.2 Action Plan for Community-level Biodiversity Mainstreaming in the Niger
Delta is developed and implemented.
Activity 1: Elaborate a Niger Delta Biodiversity Action Plan.
Under this activity, the project will focus on operationalising the Biodiversity Sector
Report derived from the Niger Delta Regional Development Master Plan. Under auspices
and guidance of NDDC, a working group of experts will be formed to elaborate an Action
Plan to identify priority mainstreaming activities to improve management of biodiversity in
the Delta in the four pilot states. With a focus on the O&G sector-related threats and
barriers to mainstreaming, the action plan will identify critical biodiversity areas where: (a)
O&G development is to be avoided altogether; (b) O&G projects are allowed, but should
have mitigation measures to reduce biodiversity impacts; and (c) restoration is needed. The
planning process will also elaborate measures conservation and sustainable use by local
communities.
A specific biodiversity action plan has never been developed for the Niger Delta Region as
one a whole. However, a significant amount of disparate work has already been done
related to this task. The Biodiversity Sector Report developed as part of the Delta Master
Plan process is a good example. The same applies to the Biodiversity Action Plans
developed by SPDC for specific, important natural areas around the Delta. Critical
ecosystems and habitats and priority species within the Delta are well known; The Delta’s
“last best places” are well known such as the stronghold habitats for globally significant
species like the Niger Delta red colobus monkey (Procolobus epieni), an endangered
primate endemic to the Delta. Work under this activity will draw upon this extensive body
of work, incorporate the cutting edge biodiversity mainstreaming practices and tools, and
through a participatory process generate a short and concise results-based action plan for
conserving the globally significant biodiversity of the Niger Delta.
The approach of this planning exercise will be guided in part by answering the question:
“How does biodiversity conservation, sustainable use and benefit sharing contribute to
development?” Actions will by necessity include many sustainable use activities and the
planning process will draw heavily upon the Biodiversity Sector Report’s main
recommendations highlighted in Chapter 9 of that report. For example, fisheries
enhancement programmes could be elaborated to both conserve critical water bodies and
the mangrove and forest ecosystems around them, while enabling local people to generate
additional income and employment. Existing community-protected lakes and other bodies
of water will be priorities for these kinds of conservation and sustainable use projects.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
56
Output 1.3. The biodiversity elements of legal and policy frameworks governing the
O&G sector and its regulation are strengthened.
Activity 1: Mainstream biodiversity criteria and objectives into the EIA process affecting
the O&G sector in the Niger Delta.
This activity is at the level of the governance framework for the mainstreaming of BD
into the EIA process (regulations, and capacity). Work will focus specifically upon on
making the elements of the EIA process more biodiversity relevant and focused,
involving government institutions with primary responsible for the EIA (FMoE, DPR,
and SMoE) as well as O&G companies. For example, project resources will support the
formation of a working group chaired by the FMoE, together with 1-2 SMoE and the
DPR, to formulate and implement an MoU to ensure agreement on how to give the proper
emphasis to biodiversity in future O&G EIAs in the Niger Delta. The matrix below
summarizes the type of input the project will provide to strengthen the governance
framework for the mainstreaming of BD into the EIA process, noting that GEF funds will
not be used to finance EIA, but rather ensure, through specialized technical assistance,
that the actions mentioned below are implemented:
Matrix 1: Mainstream biodiversity criteria and objectives into the EIA process
Main Steps of the EIA Process
O&G operator submits project proposal to the
FMoE, Department of Environmental
Assessment (DEA) for screening to determine
the need for EIA;
 The vetting of Terms of Reference (TOR)
by DEA for the EIA studies to ensure that only
significant issues (impacts) are studied in the
EIA.
 Optional site visit/verification exercise may
be required to aid the process.
 Conducting the EIA: O&G operators often
contract independent consultants and private
consulting firms to gather baseline data, consult
with stakeholders, and prepare the EIA report.
 O&G operators submit draft EIA report to
DEA for review.
 In-house DEA review of the draft EIA;
comments/feedback provided to O&G operator.
PRODOC
Actions/Entry points for Biodiversity
Mainstreaming.
Biodiversity checklist developed to help DEA screen
projects for biodiversity issues. This could include
use of IBAT, and preliminary screening questions as
to nature of the project and likely impact vis-à-vis
primary and secondary effects on biodiversity.
Guidelines for DEA on how to review the ToR from
a biodiversity mainstreaming perspective to ensure
that the EIA incorporates biodiversity issues into its
assessment. Clear, simple, easily applied guidelines.
Biodiversity checklist to assist in determining the
need for site visit/verification exercise.
- What kind of verification would be needed from a
biodiversity perspective?
- What should DEA or DPR staff look for on a site
visit?
Guidelines for the Nigerian consulting firms on how
to incorporate biodiversity concerns into the work
developing the EIA.
Guidelines on how to analyze and assess biodiversity
information and present it in an understandable way
in the final EIA report. Best practice examples.
Review guidelines for DEA/DPR on how to assess
the biodiversity aspects of an EIA report – what are
the key central elements that should be assessed?
How can they suggest improvement in clear,
implementable recommendations? Lists of sample
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
57
Main Steps of the EIA Process
Actions/Entry points for Biodiversity
Mainstreaming.
questions that could be asked which are reasonable
and answerable in the Nigerian context.
Key issues such as how practically to enhance accountability and a results focus by
mandating post EIA inspections to assess the success of the EIA process vis-à-vis
biodiversity will be included and procedures for how to conduct such an assessment piloted
under this activity. Recommendations for improving public participation in the EIA process
through minimal steps such as building an online database of EIAs will also be
promulgated.
Project resources will also bring together an expert working group to review and update the
biodiversity aspects of the existing O&G sectoral guidelines for EIA in Nigeria. Specific,
detailed updates will be made that incorporate biodiversity conservation objectives into the
process will be made in close consultation with the FMoE and SMoEs.
The EIA process/procedures manual will be amended to ensure that basic biodiversity
damage assessment and compensation policies for O&G projects are in place, including the
option to fund offsets through the NDBT. Based upon economic valuation of biodiversity
done worldwide and in Nigeria by BDCP, project resources will enable expert attention to
be focused on defining and establishing simple and practical valuation and compensation
practices. These new biodiversity-oriented compensation policies will enable FMoE, SMoE
and LGA, as well as O&G companies to either ensure that ecosystems are recovered to preproject conditions or to implement adequate off-setting measures using the NDBT as a
disbursement mechanism.
Activity 2: Broaden the Department of Petroleum Resources’ (DPR) “Policy Document for
the O&G Industry” and elaborate practical guidance for incorporating biodiversity
conservation objectives into all phases of O&G project cycle.
Work under this output will focus in particular upon the practical “how-to” aspects of
integrating biodiversity conservation objectives into relevant laws and regulations
governing the O&G sector in the Niger Delta, as this is one of the major gaps in the law
and policy framework – lack of clear and measurable steps for how those in the oversight
and enforcement role can establish and monitor achievement of biodiversity management
objectives as part of an O&G operation.
This will include working with the MPR/DPR to broaden its “Policy Document for the
O&G Industry” to incorporate biological diversity conservation objectives and to ensure
that the focus of the primary MPR policy goes beyond pollution prevention and clean-up to
embrace prevention of impact, biodiversity management objectives and restoration using
modern ecological principles and techniques.
Work will focus on practical guidance to enable Government, O&G companies and local
communities to improve how biological diversity is considered during all phases of the
multi-phase oil and gas project life cycle (See Figure 5). Opportunity and risk assessments,
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
58
exploration, and field development practice will be strengthened to account for the
assessment of biodiversity risks in key Niger Delta ecosystems. Improved use of data and
information and other decision support tools (including IBAT) will be demonstrated under
this work and in the work under Outcome 2.
Figure 5: The Oil and Gas Project Life Cycle
Activity 3: Provide strategic biodiversity mainstreaming input to final stages of Petroleum
Industry Bill discussions in the National Assembly.
A working group of Nigerian legal and biodiversity experts will be formed by the project to
draft recommendations to inform the ongoing debate and final polishing of the new draft
Petroleum Industry Bill (PIB) now being considered by the National Assembly.
Among the key areas of input to relevant aspects of the PIB will be:
Matrix 2: Mainstreaming of biodiversity into the new Petroleum Industry Bill
Main relevant elements of the PIB
Types of mainstreaming recommendations to
be made
a) Provides for environmental quality
management through submission of
environmental programme / environmental
quality management plan;
b) Provides for consultation with State
Departments;
c) Financial provision by licensee/lessee
for remediation of environmental damage;
d) Financial provisions by State and Local
Government in cases where damage has been
caused by sabotage;
e) Provides for decommissioning and
abandonment in accordance with guidelines
issued by the NPI; and
PRODOC
Incorporate overall ambitious goal into each EQM –
net positive benefit for biodiversity. Include specific
types of biodiversity targets emphasizing SMART
indicators, link to biodiversity elements of EIA.
Include specific provisions for how and why to
involve State Departments of Environment re
biodiversity.
Seek to raise the bar from remediation of damage to
net positive impact with respect to biodiversity.
Incorporate the Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust as a
mechanism through which financial assistance could
be invested to remediate damage.
Include specific biodiversity provisions for this
critical stage of the O&G project life cycle.
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
59
Main relevant elements of the PIB
Types of mainstreaming recommendations to
be made
f) Explicitly provides for restoration in the
aftermath of harm to the environment (i.e.
compensation only will no longer be acceptable).
Highlight the need for: ecologically based restoration
with global best practice and biodiversity targets.
New methods for calculating the full range of damage
in connection with O&G operations in the Niger Delta
-- more must be taken into account than the loss of
crops and fish resources in cases of compensation.
Highlight the need for localised options assessments
& solutions, if biodiversity values are to be
effectively mainstreamed in the process.
The mainstreaming of biodiversity concerns into the Environmental Guidelines and
Standards of the Petroleum Industry in Nigeria (EGASPIN) will also be targeted. Working
closely with DPR, a small working group of experts will provide technical expertise and
recommendations for updating the Revised (2002) EGASPIN environmental guidelines to
look beyond avoiding and reducing pollution to include the full range of biodiversity
conservation and ecosystem health parameters needed in order for the timely identification
and assessment of biodiversity risks and opportunities related to a project. These
recommendations will be part of the planned 2010-2011 revision of EGASPIN. This will
include clear and practical “how to” guidance on incorporating the consideration of
primary and secondary impacts on biodiversity from O&G operations across the full life
cycle. This in turn will allow full consideration of these risks and opportunities at decision
points during project development and implementation planning.
Activity 4. Produce a specific “biodiversity update” for NOSDRA’s and DPR’s existing oil
spill contingency plan(s) for the Delta.
Working with NOSDRA, DPR, and O&G industry partners, the project will convene an
expert working group with the requisite technical expertise to update the existing oil spill
contingency plans in the Delta with biodiversity-oriented information, focussing on areas at
higher risk of oil spills (older pipelines) and on areas of biodiversity significance, underlain
with the most advanced understanding possible of currents and tidal actions/directions in
the Delta and the likely pathways oil spills might take emanating from one area or another.
This will include consultations with stakeholder communities regarding specific roles that
communities might take in oil spill response to protect high-value habitats.
The working group will produce specific detailed updates and a detailed mechanisms for
oil spill contingency planning to be put in place, focussing on rapid response measures for
biodiversity rich areas in the Niger Delta that are effectively supported by community
monitoring groups in these areas.
By enhancing the collaboration between NOSDRA, DPR, industry players and
communities, mechanisms for oil spill biodiversity contingency planning will be put in
place with a focus on rapid response measures for biodiversity rich areas in the Niger
Delta. Communities will be involved as first responders in biodiversity sensitive areas and
clean up monitors to ensure accountability for implementation of the plan.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
60
Output 1.4. The capacity of key Federal and State government agencies to assess and
mitigate the risks and threats to biodiversity from the O&G sector in the Niger Delta is
strengthened.
Under this output, GEF resources will be utilized to train federal, state and municipal staff in
biodiversity-related regulations, their enforcement and novel approaches to biodiversity
management.
Activity 1. Conduct a training needs assessment. An international expert in biodiversity and
training needs assessment will conduct a training needs assessment regarding
mainstreaming issues in the four pilot Delta States. In Activity 2 below, a training
programme, drawing upon best practice world-wide will be designed in response bringing
in at least 2-3 experts in key areas of need to conduct a series of training workshops, with
the intention of training at least 2 Nigerian trainers to continue the process in Nigeria and to
provide ongoing support. The project can assist in development of capacity for undertaking
environmental impact assessment as relate to biodiversity issues in the oil and gas sector.
Activity 2: Develop and conduct annual “Niger Delta Biodiversity Leadership” capacity
building program.
Beginning in latter half of year one, the project will develop and initiate an annual “Niger
Delta Biodiversity Leadership” (NDBL) capacity building program that brings together
five people from each of the four pilot states to go through a two step training program of
leadership development in biodiversity mainstreaming, focusing on key policy, education,
business, biodiversity-specific and development issues and with an emphasis on the
practical “how to.” Participants may be nominated by their organization or apply
themselves online. Up to 20 participants for each session of two, 1-week classes will be
carefully selected through an online transparent application process to have a range of
backgrounds relevant to biodiversity conservation and the O&G sector in the Niger Delta.
Participants will include representatives from the Federal level (FMoE, DPR, NDCC,
MND, NOSDRA and NESREA) and State MoE level.
Participants will form an important bond, creating a powerful network of drive, talent and
biodiversity leadership for the Niger Delta region. This undertaking will begin with a
vision for the future of the Delta’s natural environment and particularly its biodiversity and
will be an opportunity for collaboration that spans the Delta’s geography, State boundaries
and cuts across sectors (Government and non-government and private). Participants will
maintain their “day jobs” but will need to be able to take leave to attend the NDBL
Program’s five 3-day sessions organized every 5-6 weeks in a different location around the
Delta. Each session will be designed to focus upon a different important element of how to
improve conservation of the Niger Delta’s precious biological and ecological wealth while
ensuring a vibrant and robust O&G sector that yields huge economic benefits for Nigeria.
Each training group will go through two 1 week training sessions spaced two months apart.
Each day of each session will have a different focus, focusing upon issues like the
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
61
following: (i) The Delta’s biological diversity – what is it and why is it important? How to
develop a Biodiversity Action Plan and think “outside the box” for win-win solutions; (ii)
How to monitor and manage the state of key Niger Delta ecosystems and species; (iii) How
to determine key threats to biodiversity and impacts on it that are directly linked to O&G
developments; (iv) How to prevent and mitigate these threats and impacts by engaging
local community stakeholders more effectively; (v) how to improve collaboration on the
enforcement of regulations covering the O&G sector’s activities with respect to impact on
biodiversity. Participants will choose an issue to develop in more detail as “home-work” in
between the two training sessions and will present their results at the second session. At
least three of these sessions would be held each year, with at least 300 people being trained
at the end of exercise.
Although Cross Rivers State is not one of the project’s core States, the State government is
one of the most progressive in Nigeria in dealing with the private and communities in the
forestry sector, including in enforcement of regulations, as well as in biodiversity
conservation. As such, Cross Rivers will be an ideal peer-to-peer learning venue for one of
the sessions.
Activity 3: Develop a scholarship program for funding by PTDF.
Project resources will support work with the PTDF Management Committee to develop
scholarship program for environmental studies/biodiversity conservation mainstreaming in
O&G sector academic work. Resources will also work with universities in the Delta to
enable them to prepare funding proposals for research and endowments to establish
sustainable educational and training programs in the Delta on biodiversity mainstreaming
into the O&G sector.
Activity 4: Elaborate short course teaching modules on key biodiversity topics for use in
Delta-area schools and training institutes.
The project’s strategic approach to strengthen capacity is to do so systematically to enhance
sustainability of capacity building measures. This involves working closely with existing
programs and institutions, such as the PTDF. With respect to providing new training
opportunities for existing government staff in the Delta, the project will work with
participating Universities and the Petroleum Training Institute to elaborate short courses of
instruction (teaching modules) on EIA (with a biodiversity angle).
Outcome 2: Government, the O&G industry and local communities build and pilot new
biodiversity action planning tools for the proactive biodiversity management in the Niger
Delta.
163. Under Outcome 2, the project is designed to employ two incentive mechanisms for
engaging the O&G industry in mainstreaming biodiversity into the O&G sector in the Niger
Delta. The first is to base the O&G company mainstreaming work on the objectives and
priorities of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in the context of the conservation and
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
62
development challenges and opportunities in the Niger Delta. Focusing on the CBD enables the
O&G sector to adopt a standard approach to biodiversity that is agreed not only by the
Government of Nigeria but by more than 190 other nations. Focusing on the biodiversity
challenges and opportunities on the ground in the Niger Delta will enable the O&G sector to
engage with local communities in terms of their needs and capacities to deliver biodiversity
management.
164. And secondly, to have an agreed approach for O&G company Biodiversity Action Plans
(BAPs) for the Niger Delta. Such a BAP will be a CBD-based standard for the O&G sector in the
Niger Delta. Together these areas constitute the core elements of a logical approach to
biodiversity action in the region. The following are the outputs necessary to engage the O&G
operators, local communities and State government bodies in collaborative proactive biodiversity
management in the Niger Delta.
Output 2.1. An agreed approach for O&G company Biodiversity Action Plans (BAPs)
for the Niger Delta is achieved.
Activity 1: Produce an O&G BAP guide for the Niger Delta.
Based on the IPIECA Oct 2005 guide “A guide to developing biodiversity action plans for
the O&G sector,” which is widely adopted by the industry, an immediate project activity
will be to produce an updated, revised guide focused on the Niger Delta such as indicated
in Matrix 3.
Work under this output will seek to raise awareness among O&G companies, federal and
state government, local government and non-governmental stakeholders as to the full
scope of appropriate biodiversity conservation actions available. This work will draw
upon reference materials already in existence or under development (e.g. EIP or IPIECA),
as well as developing new Niger Delta-specific material. A working group of experts will
be convened under the auspices of FMoE/DPR to elaborate the Guide.
Matrix 3: Outline of IPIECA and Proposed Guide to BAP preparation.
IPIECA 2005 guide
FMoE/DPR Niger Delta Guide to BAP (proposed)
1. Understanding Biodiversity
1. Understanding biodiversity – Components and
objectives
2. What is a Biodiversity Action Plan?
2. What is a Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP)?
2.1 What is the relationship between BAPs and other
biodiversity action plans?
Revise presentation in light of ESIA, EMP, etc as used by
2.2 What is the relationship between a BAP and an ESIA the sector in Nigeria
or EMP?
3. Deciding if a BAP is mandatory, necessary or
recommended
3.1 Legal, regulatory, planning, permitting or third party
requirements
3.1.1 Legal and regulatory requirements
3.1.2 Planning and permitting requirements
PRODOC
3. Why have a BAP?
3.1 Government regulations
3.2 Government relations [note: where reference to a
NBSAP comes in]
3.3 Investor requirements
3.4 Supply chain security
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
63
IPIECA 2005 guide
FMoE/DPR Niger Delta Guide to BAP (proposed)
3.1.3 Third party requirements
3.2 Presence of significant observed or predicted
biodiversity impacts
3.2.1 Preliminary desktop assessment
3.2.2 Baseline survey of biodiversity
3.2.3 Biodiversity impact assessment
3.3 Business benefits and the business case for a BAP
3.5 Corporate social responsibility
4. Preparing and Implementing a BAP
4.1 Prerequisites
4.2 Preparation of the BAP
4.2.1 Establishment of priorities for conservation
4.2.2 Identification of conservation action
4.3 Implementation of the BAP
4.4 Monitoring, evaluation and improvement
4.5 Reporting, communicating and verification
4. Preparing and implementing a BAP
4.1 Preliminary assessment including a biodiversity
baseline survey
4.2 Preparation of the BAP
4.2.1 Establishing biodiversity priorities
- ‘inside the fence’ and ‘outside the fence’
- development/construction phase, operations phase,
closure/decommissioning phase
- stakeholder consultations, input on biodiversity
priorities and analysis of relevant roles/responsibilities.
4.2.2 Establish biodiversity actions
4.3 Implementation of the BAP
4.4 Monitoring, evaluation and reporting
4.5 Independent verification, adaptive management
5. Stakeholder engagement, partnerships for biodiversity
5.1 Stakeholder engagement and consultation
5.2 Development of partnerships
5. Stakeholder engagement plan (covering all steps under
section 4 above)
5.1 Niger Delta biodiversity partnerships
5.2 Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust
5.3 Stakeholder engagement
Company Case Studies
1. Shell
2. Chevron
3. EnCana
4. BP
5. ConocoPhillips
6. Best practices in the Niger Delta
APPENDIX 1. Glossary and Acronyms
APPENDIX 1. Glossary and acronyms
Should be based on terms as officially defined under the
CBD and other multilateral conventions, as appropriate.
APPENDIX 2. Further resources
A. Contacts, potential partners and information sources
B. Annotated bibliography
APPENDIX 2. Further resources
Perhaps also on a website so that it can be updated
throughout the life of the UNDP/GEF project
Our approach should assume that all companies will have
a BAP for their operations in the Delta and this chapter
will provide the rationale
Each company during the process of doing its own BAP
may profile good work done to date as examples of best
practice.
APPENDIX 3. Variation in BAP activities according to Incorporate this topic into Chapter 4 above.
industrial life cycle stage
The BAP for the O&G sector will focus on the geographically defined areas where the
extractive activities occur, as well as on the ‘upstream’ and ‘downstream’ areas affected by
these activities. The management of these areas should be compliant with the objectives
and priorities of the CBD. In particular, it should focus on the following four objectives:
 Conservation
 Sustainability
 Equity
 Development
Each BAP should, as appropriate, address the following four components of biodiversity:
 Ecological complexes
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
64



Ecosystems
Species
Biological resources
Such a guide will be developed in consultation with all stakeholders including
representatives of the O&G sector, Government and local communities. Once finalized, it
will serve as the primary reference document for planning and implementing responsible
biodiversity actions by the O&G companies and by the FMoE and DPR in coordinating
dovetailing the BAP with the EIA. One of the main purposes of the Guide will be to clarify
biodiversity actions needed under Nigerian law and policy and to customize industry best
practice to the Niger Delta context.
In addition, a compendium of biodiversity solutions for the O&G sector addressing threats
to biodiversity from O&G operations in the Niger Delta, offering case-tailored biodiversity
conservation solutions, will be made available and tested on the ground. IBAT will serve as
the information basis for conceiving and elaborating upon these solutions. The
compendium will be tested under Output 2 below and by projects funded through the Niger
Delta Biodiversity Trust developed under Outcome 3.
Figure 6: The biodiversity damage mitigation hierarchy and optimal point for offsetting
Note: Adapted from a Power Point slide by Joshua Bishop (Senior IUCN Advisor, Economics and Environment)
and Martin Hollands (Fauna and Flora International) in connection with their work under the Business and
Biodiversity Offsets Program (BBOP). See e.g. http://bbop.forest-trends.org/
The immediate focus of a BAP will be on mitigating the biodiversity impact of O&G
operations ‘inside the fence’— i.e. in the areas under an O&G company’s direct
management responsibility. In this respect, the BAP may want to include the guidance
developed under the Business and Biodiversity Offset Programme (BBOP)35 with respect
to implementing a mitigation hierarchy as outlined in Figure 6. See also Box 2.
35
See: http://bbop.forest-trends.org/.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
65
Box 2: Considerations on biodiversity offsets in the Niger Delta
Offsets generally require in situ conservation results that match the project’s impacts—explicitly or implicitly.
One important consideration is the capacity of companies to actually conserve an area “outside of the fence”
within the current framework. This is challenging not only because the gaps in knowledge on the Delta’s
biodiversity, but also for reasons of governance and the sustainability of actions in the Delta. Even if an area is
effectively conserved through an offset, it is unlikely to address the other critical biodiversity objectives than
strict conservation: of sustainable use and equitable benefit sharing, with development outcomes. Without
addressing these other aspect, the sustainability of a conservation-focused offset will always be at risk.
Also, importantly, the analysis of threats for this project showed that the actual impact of the O&G sector on
the environment (biodiversity) is relative when compared to other pressures such as population pressures,
poverty-driven degradation, and possibly also oil theft activities. Generally speaking, threat attribution in the
Delta is a fuzzy affair. Yet, because of the O&G sector’s economic importance in the Niger Delta (not to
mention for the country), they are perceived to bear an important responsibility in dealing with a number of
problems in the region, including the environmental deficit.
Guidance from the Business and Biodiversity Offsets Programme (BBOP) on this matter is instructive. See in
particular: bbop.forest-trends.org/guidelines/odh.pdf: “A feature that distinguishes offsets from other forms
of ecological compensation (such as compensatory conservation, biodiversity enhancement) is the requirement
to demonstrate ‘no net loss’ or a ‘net gain’.” There will always be challenges in determining a ‘biodiversity
currency’ and appropriate ‘metrics’ in offsetting. This could exacerbate the already inherent difficulties of
developing an appropriate and credible offsetting programme for the Delta.
Therefore, this project will approach the issue of offsets through a partnership approach to biodiversity by
promoting Delta-wide efforts to restore degraded areas together with communities. Shell plans e.g. to focus on
mangroves as a theme and to support community-based restoration efforts which have clear economic
livelihood aspects (whether through more sustained use of biological resources such as fish stocks, or new
biological businesses such as aquaculture or, if needed, alternative economic opportunities. In this sense, their
engagement will have broader socio-environmental impacts and a greater chance of being sustainable.
The expected outcome of this approach, which the project will develop through industry and community
engagement, is that sustaining likelihoods to conserve biodiversity in the Delta has a better chance of
developing a more positive, more secure and less risky relationship between the sector and the communities in
the Delta. In short, the project proposes a ‘new deal’ between the sector and the communities, which is based
on conserving biodiversity through development-focused engagement. It is about a virtuous relationship
between the companies and the people in which saving ‘their’ Delta becomes a common cause.
Furthermore, through the BAPs (output 2.1) and by expanding the application of the IBAT (output 1.1), the
knowledge base on biodiversity will increase. This will also allow partners involved in offsetting to pinpoint
areas in the Delta in which more strict conservation actions are suited and where a more ‘technical’ approach
to offsetting can succeed but still with the engagement of communities.
Regarding biodiversity actions ‘outside the fence’ these could, where applicable, include
like-for-like offsets (i.e. the more ‘technical’ approach to offsetting referred to in Box 2) of
specific direct impacts as proposed by BBOP (Matrix 4). They could also include broader
mitigation of the indirect impact of the value chains of the O&G companies as proposed in
the discussion of a Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust in the following section.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
66
Matrix 4: A biodiversity action matrix
Ecological
Complexes
Ecosystems
Species
Biological
resources
Conservation
Sustainability
Equity
Development
The four objectives of a BAP can be combined with the four biodiversity components to
provide a biodiversity management matrix for a geographically-defined area as in Figure 6.
A BAP for an O&G project should, as appropriate, address what it could deliver in each of
the 16 cells in this matrix. Depending on the “ecological, genetic, social, economic,
scientific, educational, cultural, recreational and aesthetic values” (Preamble) of a
particular area, however, some of the cells may be of critical importance to its
management, while others may be of less or little importance.
Output 2.2: A participatory process is instituted for the pilot demonstration of
community-engagement in BAP for mainstreaming biodiversity management objectives
into O&G project lifecycle.
Biodiversity Action Plan Steps
- Social, Regulatory, Ecosystem Context
- Partnerships/Stakeholder Engagement Plan
- Biodiversity Assessment Survey
- Identification of Impacts, Mitigators, Enhancement Opportunities
- Action Plan Development & Indicator Identification
- Plan Implementation
- Monitoring, Improvement
Ensuring the long-term success and sustainability of biodiversity mainstreaming efforts both
inside and outside “the fence” requires enabled partners in the local communities who inhabit
the area. The purpose of Outcome 2 is to engage productively and proactively the O&G
sector and local communities in biodiversity conservation in the Niger Delta. This output will
develop pilot demonstrations of this collaboration in a joint effort with participating O&G
companies and local communities.
Activity 1: Elaborate Community BAP profiling community priorities and roles across
O&G BAP’s main steps;
Based upon the “Guide for BAP in the Niger Delta” this activity will work with one or
more partner O&G operators and up to 20 communities to demonstrate effective local
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
67
community engagement in BAP preparation and implementation by elaborating and
implementing a simple and concise, easily understood community BAP complimenting the
respective O&G BAP.
Activity 2: Implement the Community BAPs.
Inhabitants of up to 20 pilot communities located in proximity to relevant O&G operations
will be engaged in implementing their own BAPs in support of one or more O&G BAPs.
This will likely include activities such as; land-use planning, resource use and traditional
use rights mapping and recording exercises for local landscapes and waterscapes, and
improving sustainable use and livelihoods linked to local biodiversity resources. Project
resources will be made available to bring together a small team of Nigerian community
experts to work closely with a working group of representatives from the participating local
communities. The implementation process will enable local communities to participate
actively in key decision-making processes that affect biodiversity across the multi-step
O&G project lifecycle.
The process will be not just one of enabling input from communities in terms of their
knowledge, traditional use practices, rights and priorities. It will also be one of capacity
building with local communities to enable them to actively participate in key decisionmaking processes that affect biodiversity, including those by the industry. The ultimate
goal is to improve understanding by local communities and ‘buy-in’ from local
communities and “ownership” of local communities of the project process as partners and
as front-line biodiversity users and conservers.
There are some topics specifically related to biodiversity that will be included in this
engagement process. One of the most significant is local knowledge and use of
biodiversity. The specific role and place of indigenous people as rights holders on their
traditional lands and in relation to customarily used resources will be an important part of
stakeholder engagement in certain situations.
Other important biodiversity-related topics for stakeholder engagement include local
communities’ dependence on ecological resources for food, water, livelihoods and aesthetic
well-being, the potential human health impacts of degradation of ecological resources, and
the likelihood and potential consequences of secondary impacts to biodiversity for local
populations.
The effective implementation of such a plan as part of the BAP can help a company build
trust, manage expectations and earn a “social license to operate,” a tacit agreement that is
based on the good will of communities and officials36. This informal license allows
companies to enjoy a better working environment, avoid conflict, foresee and prevent
potential problems, forge local partnerships and improve their global business reputations.
Earning such a license does not require companies to acquiesce to every demand, but it
does require companies to enter into a genuinely participatory process.
36
2008. EIB. Integrating Biodiversity Conservation into Oil and Gas Development.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
68
Output 2.3: O&G BAPs are independently reviewed as a means to improve corporate
biodiversity mainstreaming practices.
The project will work with leading O&G industry players to review their corporate
EMP/BAP that apply to the Niger Delta, with the aim of sound biodiversity management
practices applied to exploration, extraction, transport, and decommissioning activities.
Activity 1: Undertake on-going independent reviews of existing or new BAPs and
biodiversity-related activities under development to assess progress and to identify
opportunities for strengthening existing plans and actions and for establishing new BAPs.
These biodiversity action plans for leading O&G companies collaborating in this Niger
Delta Biodiversity Project, will effectively incorporate conservation principles and
implement actions to safeguard biodiversity, in exploration, extraction, transport, and
decommissioning activities.
With the guide and the Trust outlined in Outcome 3, it will be possible for the project to
establish an Independent Review Team (IRT) for the O&G companies which would be
tasked with reviewing their biodiversity plans and actions and would be empowered to
propose how to strengthen these new plans and actions. Importantly, the findings and
opinions of the panels would probably need to be confidential (at least in the initial stages)
so that they help the companies to identify biodiversity opportunities rather than increase
company risk.
The IRT(s) would consist of one or more small 3-member teams of national and
international experts with appropriate expertise including conservation biology, sustainable
development, environmental and social management, and the O&G industry. The IRT
would advise the company on biodiversity opportunities both ‘inside’ and ‘outside the
fence.’ The UNDP/GEF project and the O&G companies will select the teams jointly.
The team will visit the companies once or twice a year for each of the four-five years of the
project and write a report to the company which would consist of two parts – a general
report which the company could, if they chose to, share with others including the
shareholders and a ‘letter to management’ about issues arising which might be sensitive in
nature and require more investigation than was possible in a short visit of an independent
review panel.
Work under this output would be co-funded by GEF funds and by the companies
themselves: a portion of the staff time could perhaps be covered by the UNDP/GEF project
to ensure the independence of the review process, while the companies could cover the
remainder costs, transportation, accommodation and related logistical arrangements.
Output 2.4. Niger Delta Biodiversity Mainstreaming Knowledge Management and
Development Program is effective in informing mainstreaming practices in the Region.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
69
Activity 1. Work under this output will focus on helping FMoE and the Niger Delta
Biodiversity Trust (Outcome 3) to build a Delta-wide biodiversity “best practice”
dissemination and replication program.
Good practice training modules will be developed for use by those who will actually
practice mainstreaming across the O&G sector, including Federal and State Government
agency staff, O&G company Heath Safety and Environment (HSE) managers, and
community leaders. The purpose of the training modules is to ensure that the new ideas,
knowledge, and skills needed for effective biodiversity management in the Niger Delta will
be taught to the current and next generation practitioners. These modules will emerge from
the pilot demonstrations under Outcome 2 and will include but not be limited to: i) How to
strengthen biodiversity mainstreaming capacity to implement practical conservation steps
or measures into their management planning; ii) How to build effective partnerships for
biodiversity mainstreaming; iii) How to develop and implement a practical monitoring
program to encourage results-based approaches; iv) How to develop and apply integrated
conservation and development practices.
Additionally, the project will support a summer internship program to help overcome the
capacity barrier of too few young university-educated Nigerian HSE staff being brought
into the field. This will be done in close cooperation with the traditional centers of
academic excellence in Nigeria for biology, ecology, natural resources and coastal or
wetland management. An open and fair competition will be held for a limited number of
internship spots each year.
In order to ensure the replicability of mainstreaming practices and capture lessons needed
to improve the effectiveness of the knowledge management programme, the project will
support the establishment of a peer-to-peer knowledge sharing web-based mechanism to
improve access to information for mainstreaming biodiversity into EIA and environmental
management planning practices in the O&G sector of the Niger Delta. This mechanism will
be open to all and will utilize web-based technologies for facilitating information exchange,
learning, and networking. The website will be designed to be interactive and to facilitate
peer-to-peer knowledge sharing through online subject blogs, email list-serves and an
online training and capacity building program for use across any organization. The training
program will be comprised of best practice biodiversity modules and video lectures from
biodiversity managers on their best practices and experiences to facilitate peer-to-peer
information exchange and brainstorming. The project’s knowledge management program
will launch an annual Niger Delta Biodiversity meeting in the Delta starting at the end of
year 1, where stakeholders will be able to discuss emerging priorities and best management
practice in interactive sessions.
Parallel to these replication activities, a mechanism for knowledge sharing and distributing
information and for making the project more transparent and more understandable for local
communities throughout the Delta will be developed and utilized. The design process for
the mechanism will focus on overcoming the challenge of how best to communicate and
share information with remote communities that have no internet using text messages on
mobile phone or other innovative ideas. Once the communication mechanism is defined,
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
70
knowledge sharing practices will be custom tailored to fit that mechanism that is most
efficacious in reaching local communities.
Activity 2. Peer-to-peer training for local community leaders from around the Delta in the
methods and practices of engaging with the O&G sector for biodiversity sustainable use
and conservation.
Project resources will enable community outreach experts and community leaders
themselves to train new community leaders in the basic steps and approaches involved in
engaging with O&G companies. Depending upon demand, sector-specific training
workshops will be organized for fisher-folk or farmers in LGA participating in the capacity
building effort. In this area, the project will work closely with existing projects such as the
FADAMA III project. Study tours will be organized for the local communities new to
proactive engagement to enable them visit demonstration communities to learn model
community engagement practices.
Training topics will revolve around methods and practices demonstrated above and how to
apply these alternative methods of improving fertility of the land and controlling pests
without burning. This will include: community-management of local fisheries; communitymanagement of sacred groves or lakes; community management of local forestlands and
wildlife populations; community monitoring of ecosystem health (e.g. mangroves, etc.).
Outcome 3: Stakeholders support long-term biodiversity management in the Niger Delta by
capitalizing and accessing the Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust as a collaborative engagement
mechanism for local communities, O&G companies and Government at its core.
This project’s PPG phase conducted an assessment of existing information on public and private
investment in biodiversity conservation in the Niger Delta in Fall 2010. As summarized in this
project’s baseline section, the assessment concluded that biodiversity conservation in the Delta is
underfunded. One study of protected area financing found a funding gap of approximately
US$1.5 - 5.5 million/year for the Niger Delta region, not including the costs of mainstreaming
biodiversity into the O&G sector, non-traditional local community managed areas and other
productive sector practices such as fisheries. Current revenue generation and allocation
modalities are generally not considered strategic and coordinated, hampering strategic and costeffective planning and management.
The financial assessment clearly indicates that under the baseline scenario there is little hope of
closing the financial gap. The financing gap speaks to more than just money – it speaks to a low
level of civil society governance of biodiversity issues in the Delta. The Niger Delta Biodiversity
(NDB) Trust to be established through this project will be designed specifically to remedy this
situation by providing improved financing for biodiversity conservation in the Delta as well as a
platform for improving collaboration (i.e. governance) among civil society. Given the low level
of baseline funding and governance for biodiversity conservation in the Delta, the Trust’s
potential conservation impacts are high.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
71
Output 3.1. Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust legally established with a transparent
management structure, to enable the efficient and transparent allocation of resources to
biodiversity conservation priorities in the Delta.
The project will support the establishment of a Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust (NDBT) to
facilitate O&G adoption of best practice “inside the fence” and enable O&G companies to
invest in biodiversity projects linked to their own BAPs ‘outside the fence’.
Activity 1: Establish the NDBT.
Project resources will support a strategic planning process for establishment the NDBT. The
proposal will describe the background and justification for establishing a Trust to support the
conservation of the Niger Delta’s globally significant biological diversity; the Trust’s legal
and organizational structure, and mechanisms that will ensure its transparent management
and its ability to serve as an impactful financing mechanism for biodiversity conservation in
the Delta. The proposal will consist of a detailed document of no more than 20-pages and a
2-page “Prospectus” for potential members in and donors to the Trust. The process of
developing the proposal will consist of a series of stakeholder consultations around the Delta,
along with a web-based blog with the latest information on the process to establish the
NDBT.
The Trust will strengthen mainstreaming by improving financing and governance of
biodiversity issues in the Delta’s O&G sector. The Trust Fund's conservation objective will
be to help secure the long-term conservation of biodiversity within the Niger Delta. The Fund
will provide a dependable source of financing allowing for more strategic planning and costeffective management.
The role of the Trust is more than just to bring financing to biodiversity conservation and
sustainable development work in the Delta. An equally important purpose of the Trust, which
reflects the UNDP’s entry point, is to provide a model for improved governance37 of
biodiversity issues in the Delta.
The United Nations emphasizes reform through human development and institutional reform.
Good governance is:




Consensus Oriented
Participatory
follows the Rule of Law
Effective and Efficient




Accountable
Transparent
Responsive
Equitable and Inclusive
37
Governance describes "the process of decision-making and the process by which decisions are implemented." The term
governance can apply to corporate, international, national, local governance or to the interactions between other sectors of
society.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
72
The Trust will be designed to incorporate all eight of these characteristics in its structure and
operations and thereby improve governance by enabling the participatory, efficient and
transparent allocation of resources to biodiversity conservation priorities in the Delta.
Areas of support: The Trust represents an opportunity to increase significantly the impact of
mainstreaming activities and to address all of the “hanging threats” that are not directly
related to the O&G sector, but are none-the-less critical, with a relatively small GEF
investment. While a final list of Trust’s main thematic areas of support will be elaborated
under the full project, a preliminary list of primary funding themes of the Trust will include:
 Identification of remaining biodiversity strongholds in the Delta;
 Conservation of remaining biodiversity strongholds;
 Ecosystem restoration (including the cleaning up of polluted areas)
 Sustainable forest management
 Sustainable extraction of NTFP
 Establishment and management of community set-asides.
The Trust will fund results-based projects for biodiversity management at the community and
state government level that are clearly linked to one or more O&G BAP and the Niger Delta
Biodiversity Action Plan (Outcome 1, Output 2). For example, Oil and Gas “Company A”,
after developing a corporate BAP for the Niger Delta (Outcome 2), would put out a request
for certain types of projects that support strategic areas of its BAP. The NDBT would work
with communities and other partners to identify project concepts and elaborate clear and
concise proposals to meet this need, resulting in a win-win situation whereby the O&G
company is able to address its BAP priorities in collaboration with local communities and
State Governments and local stakeholders are able to improve the sustainable management of
their biodiversity resources.
The Trust will serve as platform for partnerships in generating local and global biodiversity
benefits. See Annex 2 (Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust – Platform for Partnerships) for a
figure illustrating this. The Trust will play a proactive role in catalyzing investment by the
O&G sector and other investors into “bankable”, independently reviewed biodiversity
projects in the Delta. The Trust will:
 prioritize thematic and geographic areas of support based upon priorities identified in the
O&G company BAPs and the overall Niger Delta BAP;
 support the fast and efficient elaboration of promising concepts by project proponents
into simple, results-based project proposals that can be funded immediately; and
 facilitate independent third-party physical verification, evaluation and audit of these
projects.
The Trust will help communities to develop clear, succinct, uncomplicated projects that will
address direct threats to biodiversity as identified in this project’s chapter ‘Threats, Root
causes and Impacts’ plus project ideas that will emerge from the BAPs and the application of
IBAT. By enabling stakeholders to develop eligible projects, the Trust highlights the
importance of the “procees” (engaging State governments, communities and O&G
companies) as much as the “product” (fundable, impactful projects).
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
73
Structure of the Trust:
The strategic planning process will result in the legal instrument defining the Niger Delta
Biodiversity Trust and Articles of Incorporation to establish the Trust as a Nigerian
foundation under Nigeria’s Companies and Allied Matters Act (1999). The NDBT will be
created and managed in Nigeria. The Trust’s legal instrument will include the following
minimum standards:
1. The purposes for which the Trust is established, the duration of the Trust and the location
of the Trust fund’s main offices.
2. A summary of the results-based management approach to be taken by the Trust as well as
a web-based transparent monitoring, evaluation and reporting mechanism.
3. Structure and Governance of the Proposed NDBT: composition of the Board of Directors
and its powers; the procedures for appointing and replacing Board members; their
responsibilities, their term of office, and their remuneration (if any); the required
frequency of Board meetings; the number of Board members whose presence is required
in order to constitute a quorum; and the number of Board members whose vote is
required in order to approve of any proposed action.
4. The mode of appointment and responsibilities of the director and other staff of the Trust.
5. The mode of establishment and functions of any non-voting advisory committees or
councils.
6. The potential sources of revenue for the Trust (by general category).
7. Rules on how Trust monies can be invested and how they can be expended.
8. Accounting procedures and provision for outside auditors.
9. The categories of activities that can (and cannot) be funded by the Trust and procedures
for submission of project proposals.
10. Rules requiring Board members and staff to disclose any potential conflicts of interest.
11. Conditions and procedures for dissolution of the Trust, if that should ever be necessary.
At this point in time, the following preliminary details can be provided on the Trust:
Governance and Staffing:
Participation in the NDB Trust: All four core Niger Delta States, recognized national and
international oil and gas companies operating in the Delta, Federal and State Government
agencies with biodiversity and natural resource-relevant responsibilities may become a
Participant in the NDBT by depositing with the Trust a notice of intent to participate using a
simple form to this effect.
With the establishment of the NDBT, the UNDP (i.e. the Designated Administrative Agency
in Figure 7 below) shall be invited to take on fiduciary management responsibility for the
Trust’s funding stream (the endowment of the revolving fund). The NDBT revolving fund
endowment will consist of the contributions received in accordance with an agreed proposal
to establish the NDBT. To maximize investment returns on the Trust’s endowment, the
endowment will be managed by a reputable investment management firm selected via a
competitive process.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
74
The NDBT’s endowment will be managed as a revolving fund and will disburse its entire
principal and investment income over a fixed period of time (4-5 years). The NDBT will
spend the income from its investments as well as a portion of its capital each year until that
particular Tranche’s funds are expired, with a new Tranche of funding replenishing the
Trust’s coffers and allowing for the same cycle to begin again after due and independend
evaluation of the effectiveness of the mechanism. This will enable the Trust to do more with
a lower level of investment initially from donor partners. This type of structure allows the
NDBT to finance larger, medium-term projects or a series of small grants.
The NDBT will have an Assembly, a Board and a small staff complement. The Assembly
will be an important part of the Trust’s structure as it is central to the Trust’s ability to serve
as a platform for improved governance of biodiversity in the O&G sector of the Niger Delta.
The Assembly shall consist of Representatives of all Participants. The Assembly shall meet
once every 3-4 years, prior to each new replenishment of the NDBT. The Assembly will:
a) review the general policies of the Trust;
b) review and evaluate the operation of the Trust on the basis of reports submitted by the
Board on the basis of an independent report on the funding mechanism’s effectivess;
c) keep under review the membership of the Trust; and
d) consider, for approval by consensus, amendments to the agreement establishing the
NDBT on the basis of recommendations by the Board.
NDBT Board of Directors: A Board of Directors will govern the Trust. The Board will
consist of members from both the private and public sectors, with a majority from the private
sector. This is a lessons learned from the GEF’s extensive experience with Trust Funds and it
will allow the NDBT to maintain critical linkages with the government without being unduly
influenced by politics. While it is important for the Board to have linkages with diverse
sectors, the majority of the Board members should have management and/or institutional
interest in the nexus between the O&G sector and the conservation and sustainable use of
biological diversity in the Delta to ensure that the Trust’s mission is met. The exact number
of Board members will be determined and set in articles of incorporation finalized during
implementation of the Full Size Project. This will include coordinating with and building
upon lessons learned from other Trust Fund initiatives worldwide.
The Board will consist of 7-9 Members, including representatives from the: OPTS/O&G
companies, Federal and State government agencies, Local governments; and the NGO
community operating in the Delta in relevant areas. Each Member of the Board and each
Alternate shall serve for three years. Board Members and Alternates will serve without
compensation. The Board will be responsible for developing, adopting and evaluating the
operational policies and programs for NDBT-financed activities and taking into account
input from the Assembly.
The Trust will require a small staff. These professionals will be responsible for managing the
Trust's day-to-day business and for supporting and reporting to the Assembly and the Board.
At a minimum, the Trust will have a Director and Administrative Assistant. As the funds
managed by the Trust grow, the Trust’s staff may evolve to include a Program Manager(s)
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
75
and Financial Manager. The Trust’s staff will be responsible for organizing Board meetings,
review of reports of projects funded by the PA Trust, disbursement of funding, posting of
calls for proposals, etc. The Trust’s staff will initially be this project’s project management
unit. After the conclusion of this project, the Trust’s staff will be supported administratively
by the UNDP and shall operate in a functionally independent and effective manner. The
Director will be appointed to serve for three years on a full time basis by the Board. The staff
of the Trust shall include individuals hired competitively on an as needed basis. The Director
will be accountable to the Board for the performance of the Trust functions and will be
responsible for the organization, oversight and dismissal of Trust staff. Figure 7 illustrates
the envisioned NBDT management structure.
Figure 7: Envisioned NDBT Management Structure
Output 3.2. NDB Trust Capitalization: Compacts with O&G companies to capitalize the
Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust are successfully negotiated.
Activity 1. Negotiations with O&G companies and Federal and State Governments to
capitalize the first tranche of funding for the NDBT in year 4 of the project.
The strategic planning work above will serve to lay the legal and design and management
parameters for the Trust and as such provide a solid and clear basis upon which to finalize
negotiations to fund the first tranche of the NDBT.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
76
As Table 9 below shows, the funding target for the first tranche of funding for the NDBT is a
minimum of US$4 million. This will provide sufficient funds to support administration and
project funding costs for the first four year Tranche of grant making. The project
conservatively projects that at least US$900,000 will annually pass through the Trust's
revolving fund window by year 3 of the Trust’s operation.
Table 9: Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust Anticipated Funding and Expenditures (estimates - millions $)
Contributions
Total annual
Total Funds
Year of Operation
- Tranche 1
grants from
Available
and Tranche 2
Trust
Year 1 - Tranche 1
(project year 4)
Year 2
(project year 5)
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6 - Tranche 2
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Administration
costs/ project
development
/stakeholder
engagement
Balance
5% interest
Fund Corpus
Remaining
Each Year
$4.000
$4.000
$0.000
$0.000
$4.000
$0.200
$4.200
-
$4.200
$0.600
$0.050
$3.550
$0.178
$3.728
-
$3.728
$2.927
$0.700
$0.800
$0.240
$0.250
$2.788
$1.877
$0.139
$0.094
$2.927
$1.971
$4.000
-
$1.971
$4.957
$4.082
$0.800
$0.800
$0.800
$0.260
$0.270
$0.281
$0.912
$3.887
$3.001
$0.046
$0.194
$0.150
$0.957
$4.082
$3.151
-
$3.151
$2.162
$0.800
$0.800
$0.292
$0.304
$2.059
$1.058
$0.103
$0.053
$2.162
$1.111
UNDP will co-fund the initial first two years of operations of the Trust through its cash cofunding of the project management unit, which will serve as the Trust’s staff complement for
the first 2 years of its operation. This co-funding will leverage additional funds from O&G
companies and the Federal and State Governments (e.g. FMoE/Ecological Fund), who will
be the primary funders of the Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust.
Prospects for financing of the Trust: The focus of the Trust is the Niger Delta, a region that
generated over US$45 billion worth of oil in 2009. Given this fact, there are ample
opportunities to capitalize and grow the fund's endowment at or beyond the US$4 million
dollar target. The project has set aside significant resources to build government, private, and
donor support for expanded investment in the Delta’s biological diversity.
NDBT fund raising will focus initially upon O&G companies, the Federal Government
through its Ecological Fund, and State Governments. During the PPG process, Federal and
State Government expressed interest in supporting the NDBT, given sufficient lead-time to
plan budgeting requests accordingly. The Federal Government of Nigeria has established the
Ecological Fund (EF) as described in the baseline section. The EF receives approximately
1% of federal revenues each year; although the exact amount of funds populating the EF is
not published, the EF is thought to hold hundreds of millions of US$. Under this activity,
GEF resources will support the project in working closely with the Ministry of Environment
to develop a proposal to the Ecological Fund (which the MoE chairs) for EF funding to the
Trust.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
77
Government investment in the Trust will be sought either by a direct donation from the
Federal Government’s Ecological Fund or from government-imposed regulations, such as
environmental taxes, fees for use of environmental resources, fines for failing to comply with
environmental law, or compensation for environmental damage. Work under this activity will
help the FMoE to consider carefully these options and develop concept notes to the most
promising ones, including a proposal to the Ecological Fund for the NDBT’s first tranche.
The same is true for State Governments, who receive funds from the Federal Government to
support their own State-level Ecological Funds.
The project will continue to develop its relationship with the O&G sector in the Niger Delta
through the existing Oil Production Trade Sector of the Lagos Chamber of Commerce to
develop clear and beneficial links to the Sector’s corporate environment and safety programs.
The financial resources are available to support the NDBT. For example, in mid-2010
Chevron created a new foundation for partnership initiatives in the Niger Delta (PIND) and
capitalized it at the level of US$50 million. Already in a fairly short PPG process, the project
has secured firm expressions of interest and desire to support the project from the largest
O&G company operating in the Delta (see co-funding letters) and verbal expressions of
interest from others.
The project will work closely with O&G companies, the Government of Nigeria and State
Governments to discuss strategic levels of funding for the NDBT for each interested partner
and secure that funding for the Trust by year four of the project. The level of the first tranche
will be consensus-based among all investors (O&G companies, Government of
Nigeria/FMoE/Ecological Fund) and will be based upon an analysis of demand (from BAPs)
and supply of projects in the Delta conducted as part of the strategic planning exercise above.
Incentives for private sector contributions to the NDBT can be drawn from the discussion the
O&G sector context discussion of this proposal. Examples detailed in that section include:
fulfilling CSR commitments, improving corporate image, offsetting supply chain impacts and
securing sustainable supply chain inputs, satisfying investor requirements, and improving
relations with local and federal governments.
One practical approach to identifying a strategic level of support for the Trust could be to
agree to a target of a certain percentage of turnover or income from the O&G operations in
the Niger Delta. This could be modeled on the commitment of developed countries to
allocate 0.7% of national income to development assistance.38 For the O&G sector, a similar
commitment could be envisioned. For example, for every $1 billion of revenue generated by
the sector in the Delta, 0.7% or $7,000,000 could be allocated to biodiversity management
projects in the Delta.
Output 3.3. Organized communities, partnerships of communities and NGOs, and NGOs
and Government, Universities, in the Niger Delta at large have the capacity to and count
on an appropriate mechanism to access funding from the Trust.
38
See: http://www.unmillenniumproject.org/press/07.htm.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
78
Activity 1. Establish a core mechanism to enable and sustain collaboration among local
communities, state and federal authorities and the O&G companies.
This will be critical part of the institutional structure of the Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust.
The mechanism will include representation from a cross-section of local government areas
around the Delta. The mechanism will be designed to catalyze the development and
funding of small and medium-scale biodiversity projects that contribute to the achievement
of Biodiversity Action Plan targets and results-based indicators included in the Niger Delta
BAP for priority ecosystems.
Review criteria will be designed to encourage/maximize community and local stakeholder
ownership and drivenness of the project. At the grant-making level, Technical Review
Committee grant review criteria will include a requirement for co-financing, partnershipbased work, and for simple, measurable indicators of realistic, sustainable outcomes.
The mechanism will be designed to enable these projects to focus upon and measure results
through a results-based approach that includes community-based M&E tools and
approaches and capacity building for communities.
The legal and policy documentation prepared under this Output will guide the allocation of
resources to biodiversity conservation in priority Niger Delta ecosystems and the
involvement of local communities in accessing the funding. Applicant communities may be
located in the whole of the Niger Delta, and not just the oil states. A simple, web-based
progress reporting and M&E mechanism for overseeing the funded projects and capacity
building measures will be put in place for maximising transparency of the process and
letting sunshine of the world-wide web into the successes and failures of each project.
The process of designing this mechanism will draw upon valuable best practices from other
GEF projects that have faced similar challenges, such as the UNDP/GEF PoWPA project
(Country Early Action Grants project to support the CBD’s Programme of Work on
Protected Area). For example, learning from projects like this will enable this project to
bring new transparency and web-based efficiency to monitoring of implementation
progress and emerging results of NDBT projects. Grantee-based reporting will be simple
and concise, with grantees reporting on: Specific actions, numerical rating of progress to
date in implementing project and a bullet-point summary of steps taken to date. Based upon
this reporting the NDBT will be able to prioritize those community-based projects in need
of more assistance or fact checking for accuracy of reports.
RISKS AND ASSUMPTIONS
165. The project strategy, described in detail within this project document, makes the
following key assumptions in proposing the GEF intervention:
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
79






The project will be able to benefit from the current momentum created by the oil well
blowout disaster in the Gulf of Mexico with respect to the importance of strengthening the
mainstreaming of biodiversity and environmental issues into O&G activities.
The GoN’s commitment to the project is demonstrated by its participation in the EITI
initiative, by its ongoing and nearly completed revision of the O&G body of law and by the
clear trend evident in improving environmental aspects of Nigerian O&G law and policy in
the past 10 year period.
Despite some uncertainties, the O&G sector in the Niger Delta will continue to operate in a
robust manner, with new fields being explored and increasing production coming on line
from new O&G activities.
O&G operators will continue to see biodiversity conservation and collaboration with local
communities and other stakeholders as a win-win for their business model both on the local
and international levels.
Lessons learnt in the core Delta states can be successfully disseminated to the remaining
Delta five Delta States.
Increased awareness and capacity will lead to a change in behaviour by O&G operators with
respect to the mainstreaming of biodiversity into their operations and a change in behavior by
local communities and State government staff with respect to conceptualizing and
implementing local biodiversity conservation initiatives.
166. During the PPG phase, projects risks were updated from what has been presented at the
PIF stage. They were further elaborated and classified according to UNDP/GEF Risk Standard
Categories39, and assessed according to criteria of ‘impact’ and ‘likelihood’ (Box 3):
Table 10: Elaboration of Risks
IDENTIFIED RISKS
Government policies and programs will
support unrestrained O&G
development in the Niger Delta, as
world demand for oil increases.
Insecurity and violence in the Niger
Delta makes project operations
expensive and at times impossible.
Fluctuation in the global price of oil
may force O&G companies to act
short-sightedly with respect to
investments and it make them less
likely to collaborate in the project and
CATEGORY
POLITICAL
OPERATIONAL
FINANCIAL
ELABORATION
This is essentially the baseline situation albeit with a strong
trend towards more balanced policies that place a much higher
level of priority on environmentally responsible approaches to
O&G exploitation in the Delta. Evidence during the past 10
years in the form of policy changes points towards this reduced
significantly.
There are often reports of violence, including guerrila-like
conflict, street violence in major cities, such as Port Harcourt,
but also abductions of foreigners in the Niger Delta Region.
The security situation in Niger Delta States is ranked by UN
Security according to the system of phases and range from
restricted movement to relocation, depending on the area.
Travel by UN staff and consultants to and within the region is
subject to restrictions. Activities may be hampered and
operational costs will likely be higher than of other projects in
areas without security problems.
The price of commodities is an exogenous element that lies
completely outside the scope of the project, but which may
influence it positively or negatively. If the price of oil is high,
there may be a “bonanza” for biodiversity mainstremaing. If
the opposite, priorities may shift towards other types of
39
Includes the following eight categories: environmental; financial; operational; organizational; political; regulatory; strategic;
and other.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
80
IDENTIFIED RISKS
CATEGORY
capitalise the Niger Delta Biodiversity
Trust.
Local communities show resistance to
the project due to distrust of
government and O&G companies.
ELABORATION
investment. The project-buy in from the industry may have less
ideal conditions.
A similar pattern was also experienced in other UN
implemented projects in the Niger Delta. Not all communities
are amenable to engaging in the type of work proposed under
this project due to generalised distrust.
Timber extraction and agricultural expansion were also
identified as important threats to biodiversity in the Niger
Delta. They are not however being directly addressed by the
project, which focus is on threats posed by the O&G sector.
STRATEGIC
There are other, non-oil and gas related
impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem
health in the Delta that may affect
project results on the ground.
ENVIRONMENTAL
Box 3: Risk Assessment Guiding Matrix
Likelihood
Impact
CRITICAL
HIGH
MEDIUM
LOW
NEGLIGIBLE
CERTAIN / IMMINENT
Critical
Critical
High
Medium
Low
VERY LIKELY
Critical
High
High
Medium
Low
High
High
Medium
Low
Negligible
Medium
Medium
Low
Low
Negligible
Low
Low
Negligible
Negligible
Considered to pose no
determinable risk
LIKELY
MODERATELY LIKELY
UNLIKELY
Table 11: Project Risks Assessment and Mitigation Measures
IDENTIFIED RISKS
IMPACT
LIKELIHOOD
RISK
ASSESSMENT
Government policies
and programs will
support unrestrained
O&G development in
the Niger Delta, as
world demand for oil
increases.
High
Moderately
likely
Medium
Insecurity and violence
in the Niger Delta
makes project
operations expensive
and at times impossible
High
Likely
High
PRODOC
MITIGATION MEASURES
This project is linked to the expanding International
Niger Delta Partnership, which coalesces the good will of
several industry partners and donors, and builds largely
on UNDP’s credibility and the human development
approach, the project will generally become less risky,
more credible and with greater chances of having a
positive impact through industry engagement. Policies
that directly counteract the project’s objectives will have,
through the Partnership, an expanded forum for being
discussed and scrutinized. While realities will not change
in the Delta from one day to another, the Partnership is
certainly pointing in the right direction and making a
difference at localized level. In addition, the Gulf of
Mexico oil spill shed much more “sunlight” on this issue
in the Niger Delta, making more reforms in policy and
practice in Nigeria’s O&G policies for the Delta almost a
certainty.
The UN constantly assesses country and localised risk in
all areas where it operates through the unified UN
Security System. Access to areas and the roll out of both
humanitarian and development programmes suffers from
security restrictions in several parts of the Niger Delta. It
is however perfectly possible for the UN to work in other
areas. Minimum Operating Security Standards (MOSS)
will apply for all project operations, which will be
closely monitored from a security point of view. This
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
81
IDENTIFIED RISKS
IMPACT
LIKELIHOOD
RISK
ASSESSMENT
Fluctuation in the
global price of oil may
force O&G companies
to act short-sightedly
with respect to
investments and it
make them less likely
to collaborate in the
project and capitalise
the Niger Delta
Biodiversity Trust.
High
Unlikely
Low
Local communities
show resistance to the
project due to distrust
of government and
O&G companies.
High
Moderately
Likely
Medium
There are other, non-oil
and gas related impacts
on biodiversity and
ecosystem health in the
Delta that may affect
project results on the
ground.
High
Very Likely
High
MITIGATION MEASURES
involves the procurement of special equipment for
vehicles, the utilisation of approved means of
communications, restrictions on boat and small aircraft
travel and the utilisation of the security clearance system.
This will apply to project staff, but also project
consultants and agency staff on project oversight visits.
UN Security will be involved in site the selection process
with respect to sites for community-based activities under
Outcome 2.
An industry assessment was carried out as an initial
industry engagement activity under the PPG (see Annex
4). The assessment assesed O&G whether companies
have corporate environmental plans or policies for the
Niger Delta and the companies’ positions on biodiversity
conservation and their willingness to join together in a
compact to contribute to a Biodiversity Trust Fund. Most
companies operating in the Delta understand the
incentives/reasons for participating in a proactive
biodiversity conservation initiative (i.e. reputational risk,
community relations, compliance with standards or
official company policies). The level of involvement per
company need not be very large, reducing the assessment
of this risk to low.
Apart from security concerns, another key criterion for
site selection will be ‘community buy-in’. Local
consultations with communities will be extensively
carried out to determine their potential level of
engagement. The project will be thoroughly explained.
Civil society mediators will be used in that context
because of their experience with local consultations in
the region.
The project, while focussing on mainstreaming
biodiversity into the O&G sector, also has a significant
element of community engagement as the mechanism or
the strategic approach to actual “do” mainstreaming in
the Delta. Thus, the on-the-ground activities that result
from improved mainstreaming within the O&G sector
will be designed to address these key challenges related
to over-harvesting of resources and other non-O&G
related issues as well. While threats such as timber
extraction and agricultural expansion will not be directly
addressed through the project, they will possibly be
indirectly dealt with through projects to be approved
under the Trust.
Overall risk assessment: Five risks were identified, of which two are high, two are medium and one is
low. This places the project in the medium-high risk category. Besides the risk mitigation measures
proposed above, the general response to the risk level is to (1) equip the project to deal with insecurity in
the Niger Delta Region by ensuring MOSS standards are in place before project start and in the project’s
everyday routine; (2) engaging in implementation qualified Nigerians who understand the context in the
Niger Delta and who are preferably from the region; and (3) ensuring a swift start of the NDBT so that
expectations from potential beneficiaries to the project are quickly satisfied and “hanging threats” to the
Niger Delta’s biodiversity that are not related to the O&G industry are dealt with.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
82
INCREMENTAL REASONING AND EXPECTED GLOBAL, NATIONAL AND LOCAL BENEFITS
Reasoning and Summary of Benefits
167. In the baseline situation, the trend for biodiversity in the Niger Delta is not a positive
one, with increasing pressures and ad hoc, under-funded efforts to conserve biodiversity. In the
baseline scenario, the oil and gas sector – the largest economic sector in all of Nigeria (not to
mention the Delta itself) – will continue to be governed with almost no attention paid to the
biological diversity of the Delta. Low levels of information on and knowledge of biodiversity,
awareness of biodiversity and its importance, and capacity to manage biodiversity in the Delta
will hinder any baseline movement towards a more biodiversity friendly O&G sector in the
Niger Delta. This hindrance will aggravate other law and policy barriers that downplay
biological diversity in critical regulatory processes like EIA and oil spill response planning. This
hindrance will aggravate barriers preventing O&G companies from adopting international best
practice for biodiversity mainstreaming, and barriers preventing effective collaboration among
key stakeholder groups in the Delta. In the absence of catalytic, incremental GEF funding
leveraging additional strategic co-funding, threats to globally significant biodiversity will
continue to increase, the condition of the Delta’s biodiversity will continue to be diminished, and
the global and local benefits represented by this biological diversity will be lost.
168. In the alternative scenario enabled by the GEF project, global biodiversity benefits
will be generated in Nigeria primarily through barrier removal towards the mainstreaming of
biodiversity management priorities into the Niger Delta’s O&G sector regulatory framework and
O&G company operations both inside and outside the fence. This will be done overall by
achieving the following three main outcomes:
Outcome 1) strengthening the governance framework of law, policy, and institutional capacity to
enable the mainstreaming of biodiversity management into the O&G sector in the Niger Delta.
This will include improving the quality of biodidversity information and access to that
information to support mainstreaming and strengthening the governance framework for the
mainstreaming of biodiversity into the EIA process, (regulations, guidelines, capacity).
Outcome 2) Piloting new O&G biodiversity action planning tools for proactive biodiversity
mainstreaming in the Niger Delta by O&G companies, Government, and local communities. This
will include introducing global best practice for biodiversity action planning into the O&G sector
and to build upon improved governance framework under Outcome 1.
Outcome 3) Supporting long-term biodiversity management in the Niger Delta by capitalizing
the Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust with a collaborative engagement mechanism for local
communities, O&G companies and Government at its core. This will result in (1) the reduction
of threats and risks to biodiversity in priority Niger Delta ecosystems linked to O&G in four oil
producing states of the Niger Delta (46,420 sq km – the indirect spatial mainstreaming target);
and (2) improved management of biodiversity of critical ecosystems within a directly targeted
area of at least 60,000 hectares. This is a conservative estimate that does not include the impact
of the projects funded through the NDBT, which will be implemented throughout the Delta. To
underscore the relevance of the project within its context, the following Box summarises the
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
83
global biodiversity significance and the potential to generate global benefits by according
protection to the Niger Delta’s Ecosystems through a mainstreaming approach:
Box 4: Global Biodiversity Significance of the Niger Delta











At least eleven Important Bird Areas (IBAs).
WWF 200 Ecoregion (#155 - Niger Delta).
Part of the Guinean Forests Hotspot
Africa’s largest mangrove area and the world’s third largest
The Niger Delta red colobus, is one of the world’s 25 most endangered primates.
The Niger Delta is one of the largest wetlands in the world and is Africa’s largest Delta;
The Delta’s outermost coastal forest zone represents some of the last remaining pristine forest resources
and centers of endemism in Africa
All of Nigeria's endemic or near-endemic mammal species and six IUCN Red List mammals: the (Niger
Delta) forest elephant (Loxodonta Africana cyclotis), the West African manatee (Trichechus senegalensis), the
White-throated guenon (Cercopithecus erythrogaster), the Sclater’s guenon (Cercopithecus sclateri), the pygmy
hippopotamus (Choeropsis liberiensis heslopi).
The endangered Nigeria-Cameroon Chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes vellerosus)
Globally outstanding fish fauna that displays exceptional evolutionary phenomena with its higher taxonomic
endemism and distinct species assemblages with a minimum of 314 species (313 being indigenous) from 158
genera and 64 families found in the Delta.
At least twenty (20) endemic species of fish have been recorded so far in the Delta. Unique conditions in
the Delta have nurtured the evolution of five monotypic fish Families -- Denticipidae, Pantodontidae,
Phractolaemidae, Hepsetidae and Gymnarchidae -- the highest concentration of monotypic Families of any
freshwater eco-region in the world.
System’s boundary
169. Nigeria is Africa’s most populous country and is one of the world’s leading oil producers
due to the vast oil and gas reserves in the Niger Delta. The Niger River is the principal river of
West Africa with a length of approximately 4,180 km and a drainage basin encompassing
2,117,700 km2. Over millennia, this mighty river created the Niger Delta at its with the Atlantic
Ocean and its Guinea and Benguela currents. The result of the Niger River’s progradation in this
dynamic context is a Niger Delta of globally significant physical attributes and biological and
hydrocarbon resources.
170. Africa’s largest Delta, the ND is a repository of globally significant biodiversity,
harboring at least: 11 IBA, 1 Global 200 Ecoregion (#155 - Niger Delta), part of the Guinean
Forests Hotspot, and Africa’s largest and the world’s third largest mangrove area.
171. The project’s goal is to contribute to the conservation and sustainable use of globally
significant biological diversity in the Niger Delta. The project objective is to mainstream
biodiversity management priorities into the Niger Delta oil and gas (O&G) sector development
policies and operations.
172. The project’s three main outcomes designed to achieve this objective are: 1) Stakeholders
strengthen the governance framework of law, policy, and institutional capacity to enable the
mainstreaming of biodiversity management into the O&G sector in the Niger Delta; 2)
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
84
Government, the O&G industry and local communities build and pilot new biodiversity action
planning tools for proactive biodiversity mainstreaming in the Niger Delta; 3) Stakeholders
support long-term biodiversity management in the Niger Delta by captalizing the Niger Delta
Biodiversity Trust with a collaborative engagement mechanism for local communities, O&G
companies and Government at its core.
Incremental Cost Analysis
Table 12. Incremental Cost Matrix
Cost/Benefit
Baseline
(B)
Alternative
(A)
Increment
(A-B)
Global benefits
The mainstreaming of biodiversity
into the O&G sector policies and
practices (hereafter referred to as
“mainstreaming”) will be hampered
by inadequate access to sufficient
data and information on biological
diversity. A number of policy and
legal reforms will proceed, but MoE
will be unable to develop and apply
an action plan for expanding and
improving the effectiveness of
biodiversity conservation in the
Delta. The O&G industry will
continue its activities on a businessas-usual basis. Some do show some
commitment to biodiversity
conservation, but this does not
translate into systematic actions to
address biodiversity management
from a mitigation hierarchy
perspective. The funding for
biodiversity management that the
industry can potentially generate will
remain inaccessible for improving the
standards of biodiversity management
in the Niger Delta Region.
In the alternative scenario
enabled by the GEF project,
global biodiversity benefits will
be generated in Nigeria
primarily through barrier
removal towards the
mainstreaming of biodiversity
management priorities into the
Niger Delta’s O&G sector
regulatory framework and
O&G company operations both
inside and outside the fence.
This will result in (1) the
reduction of threats and risks to
biodiversity in priority Niger
Delta ecosystems linked to
O&G in four oil producing
states of the Niger Delta
(46,420 sq km – the indirect
spatial mainstreaming target);
and (2) improved management
of biodiversity of critical
ecosystems within a directly
targeted area estimated at
60,000 hectares (footprint of
O&G majors to be determined)
within those states, but also in
the Niger Delta at large through
the micro-projects that may
emerge from the NDBT.
The project’s systemic interventions
will secure long-term global benefits by
expanding the coverage of the
improved biodiversity management
“inside the fence” of O&G operations
through BAP and “outside the fence”
through partnerships with local
communities, government, and O&G
companies. The following biodiversity
features will count on improved
management and protection /
safeguarding:
- At least eleven Important Bird Areas
(IBAs).
- WWF 200 Ecoregion #155.
- Part of the Guinean Forests Hotspot
- Africa’s largest mangrove area and
the world’s third largest
- The Niger Delta red colobus, is one
of the world’s 25 most endangered
primates.
- The Niger Delta: Africa’s largest
Delta and one of the world’s largest;
- The Delta’s outermost coastal forest
zone represents some of the last
remaining pristine forest resources
and centers of endemism in Africa
- Nigeria's endemic or near-endemic
species in the IUCN Red List
- Globally outstanding fish fauna,
including at least twenty (20)
endemic species of fish; plus
outstanding biodiversity values for
higher plants, mammals,
herptofauana and a number of other
of biodiversity features.
National and
local benefits
The perception of biodiversity as an
environmental issue and not as a
social issue or sustainable
development issue will prevail. This
has meant that biodiversity
management has had to compete with
other pressing social development
issues.
National and local benefits will
include the establishment of a
new framework for dealing
with a number of socioenvironmental issues in the
Niger Delta, which are not
restricted to biodiversity
management.
The capacity of key stakeholders to
manage and safeguard biodiversity in
the Niger Delta will increase. These
include government officials, NGO
partners, academia and a number of
community based organizations that
will be engaged in the project. Nigeria
will count on improved legal and policy
frameworks for areas such EIA,
BENEFITS
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
85
Cost/Benefit
Baseline
(B)
Alternative
(A)
Increment
(A-B)
petroleum regulations and
compensation for environmental
damage to name a few. The Niger Delta
Master Plan will be supported in its
Biodiversity Component. There will be
more trust among communities,
government and O&G companies.
COSTS
Outcome 1:
The governance
framework of
law, policy, and
institutional
capacity to enable
the
mainstreaming of
biodiversity
management into
the O&G sector
in the Niger Delta
is strengthened.
In the baseline scenario, the oil and
gas sector -- largest economic sector
in all of Nigeria and in the Delta itself
– will continue to be governed by a
regulatory framework that pays little
to no attention to the biological
diversity of the Delta and key
institutions will continue to have
virtually no capacity in biodiversityrelated issues. Low levels of
awareness, knowledge, and capacity
to manage biodiversity in the Delta
will hinder any baseline movement
by Government towards a more
biodiversity friendly O&G sector in
the Niger Delta.
Government and NGO investment in
the management of biodiversity in the
Niger Delta in has been very modest.
The baseline for this component is
estimated at:
The Alternative enabled by the
GEF for this component is
estimated at:
GEF
FMoE
TOTAL ($ million)
1.167
3.086
4.253
GEF
FMoE
Shell
TOTAL ($ million)
0.909
3.000
2.000
5.909
GEF
UNDP
TOTAL ($ million)
1.174
1.500
2.674
$5.253 million over 5 years
$1 million over 5 years
Outcome 2:
Government, the
O&G industry
and local
communities
build and pilot
new biodiversity
action planning
tools for the
proactive
biodiversity
management in
the Niger Delta.
In the baseline scenario, O&G
companies will continue to be
amenable to the concept of
biodiversity mainstreaming, but will
approach the issue in disparate, ad
hoc, inefficient ways that fail to
incorporate global best practice on
mainstreaming.
O&G corporate investment in the
management of biodiversity in the
Niger Delta cannot be properly
assessed, but there are indications
that it is modest.
The baseline for this component is
estimated at:
The Alternative enabled by the
GEF for this component is
estimated at:
$15.909 million over 5 years
$10 million over 5 years
Outcome 3:
Stakeholders
support long-term
biodiversity
management in
the Niger Delta
by capitalizing
and accessing the
PRODOC
In the baseline situation, funding for
biodiversity conservation in the Delta
will continue to be inadequate at a
level of between US$ 1 million –
US$5 million/year. In the absence of
catalytic, incremental GEF funding,
global biodiversity benefits will be
diminished and lost due in part to 50+
years of oil and gas development with
The Alternative enabled by the
GEF for this component is
estimated at:
$27.674 million over 5 years
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
86
Cost/Benefit
Baseline
(B)
Niger Delta
Biodiversity Trust
as a collaborative
engagement
mechanism for
local
communities,
O&G companies
and Government
at its core.
Others: Project
Management
Unit, Program
Implementation
Technical
Support Team,
and Indicative
Monitoring
little to no attention paid to the
conservation of biological diversity.
The baseline for this component is
estimated at:
TOTAL COSTS
Alternative
(A)
Increment
(A-B)
$25 million over 5 years
N/A
GEF
UNDP
FMoE
TOTAL ($ million)
0.361
1.000
0.064
1.425
The total baseline for the project is
estimated at:
The total alternative enabled by
the GEF for the project is
estimated at:
$36 million over 5 years
$49.899 million over 5 years
GEF
FMoE
Shell
UNDP
TOTAL ($ million)
3.249
6.150
2.000
2.500
13.899
N/A
COST-EFFECTIVENESS
173. One possible alternative for this project that has been considered was e.g. to promote
instead a protected area (PA) approach in the Niger Delta. A quick analysis has shown that there
are over 70 PAs in the wider Niger Delta Region scattered over all of the nine states of Delta40.
The largest surface of these areas are concentrated in the ‘non-oil states’ of Ondo, Edo and Cross
River and their spatial distribution is not representative of key ecosystems in the wider Delta.
Also, 90% of the PAs are forest reserves, set up mainly for timber production, while the
remaining 10% were constituted for the purpose of protecting biodiversity. Forest
mismanagement has led to a substantial loss of biodiversity in these PAs, indicating that they are
sub-effective as conservation areas. Furthermore, only a negligible fraction of the freshwater
ecosystem of the Niger Delta is covered by PAs, while no part of the marine ecosystem is under
protection.41 Although no specific gap analysis of PA coverage in the Delta has been done, PPG
information gathered by senior Nigerian experts during the PPG phase clearly shows a large
shortfall in the region in terms of PA management effectiveness and their ecosystem
representativeness. Nearly every forest rserve or game reserve in the Delta is essentially a paper
park. This would be quite costly to be addressed, in addition to recurrent costs of PA
management. One study suggests a recurrent cost of $33.6/ha/year for effective PA management
40
Phil-Eze & Okoro (2009): Sustainable biodiversity conservation in the Niger Delta: a practical approach to conservation site
selection. Biodiv Conserv 18:1247-1257.
41 Ibid.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
87
in the Niger Delta42. This is on the high end of costs for PA management when e.g. compared to
other UNDP PA projects in Africa, where costs rarely exceed $20/ha/year. The same study also
indicates that it might no longer be possible to extend coverage and ecosystem representation in
the Niger Delta due to high human pressure. In addition, regardless of the approach (protected
areas or mainstreaming), it would generally not be possible to deal with conservation issues in
the Niger Delta, if current and potential impacts from the largest economic sector in the Niger
Delta (the O&G sector) are not addressed. Considering the total GEF budget for this project of
$3.6 million over 5 years and the indirect spatial target coverage of 46,000 sq km, the project
costs may be assessed at $15.70/ha/year. This is approximately half of the estimated recurrent
costs of the PA approach. The alternative offered by this project, through governance
frameworks, industry & community engagement and conservation Trust Fund, is therefore the
most cost-effective option.
174. In addition, this project leveraged co-financing of $10,650,000 to the GEF investment in
the short term (CEO Endorsement satege) and with the long-term goal of approximately 1-3
million/year for the Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust from all co-funders after the GEF funding has
run its course. If the Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust sustains its work post-project for an
additional ten years, at approximately $1.5 million/year, then GEF funding will have leveraged
approximately $7 for every $1 GEF funds invested.
175. Additionally, a PPG analysis of use values for Niger Delta ecosystem services produced
the following figures for the primary use values (Table 13), adjusted to the general economic
price level in Nigeria as reflected by the GDP (PPP) per capita. In the context of a costeffectiveness discussion, these total value figures and the cumulative figure for all values helps
to highlight the cost-effectiveness of GEF’s targeted incremental investment.
Table 13: Use Value of Niger Delta ecosystem based on benefit transfer approach
Use Value (Direct and Indirect)
Values used for
valuation
Artisanal Fisheries
Marine Fisheries
NTFP
Timber Products of Mangrove
Carbon sequestration of mangroves
Erosion/flood control
Drinking water
Nursery ground for fish and shellfish
Sewage treatment of mangroves
Returns from forestry for other forest types (fresh
water and lowland forests, barrier island forests
and savannah)
Returns from fishery for other forest types (fresh
water and lowland forests, barrier island forests
and savannah)
Total
Size
$63/ha/yr
$11.66/ha/yr
$36.40/ha/yr
$954.35/ha/year
$6.23/ha/yr
$764.66/ha/yr
$31.95/ha/yr
178844 tons
135,238.3 tons
12,263 km2
12,263 km2
12,263 km2
12,263 km2
12,263 km2
12,263 km2
12,263 km2
Value in million
USD ($)/year
1,478.03
1,636.40
77.26
14.30
44.64
1,170.32
7.64
937.70
39.18
$150/ha/yr
112,720 km2
1,690.80
$60/ha/yr
112,720km2
676.32
5,897.19
Source: N. Chukwone. September 2010. Final PPG report “Options for the development of financial mechanisms for biodiversity
conservation in the Niger Delta.”
Bloom 2004: An estimate of the costs of an effective system of protected areas in the Niger Delta – Congo Basin Forest
Region. Biodiv Conserv 13: 2661-2678.
42
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
88
PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH NATIONAL PRIORITIES/PLANS
176. The UNDP-GEF Niger Delta Biodiversity Project has been developed with the full
support of the Federal Government of Nigeria. It is consistent with the policy guidelines and
principles of the government in relation to the conservation of biodiversity as described in the
National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP) from 2001.
177. The project is consistent with one of the primary objectives of the National Biodiversity
Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP), which is: ‘A nation that integrates biodiversity conservation
[…] into sustainable development aimed at substantially reducing poverty, designing a secure
future and facilitating the growth of the Nigerian biodiversity sector for the benefit of the
Nigerian community and economy in line with the principles of ecological sustainability and
social equity’. More specifically, the project furthers this primary vision through a three-way
collaboration among Government at all levels, Non-governmental organizations and the Private
sector. This is precisely this project’s proposed approach as well. In addition, the project
supports many of the NBSAP’s main goals and aims, including:




To improve methods and technologies that support the sustainable use of biological resources
and eliminate or minimize adverse impacts on biodiversity resulting from resource use;
To promote sustainable use of biological resources and ensure fair and equitable sharing of
benefits for poverty reduction;
To reduce the adverse impacts of land use practices on forest, watersheds, soils, other
ecosystems and species;
To enhance biodiversity management capability through education and awareness,
appropriate formulation of policy and legislation, research and international cooperation.
178. The project is consistent with the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP from 2003)
and the National and State Economic Empowerment and Development Strategies (NEEDS),
State Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (SEEDS) at the state level and Local
Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (LEEDS ) at the local level. All of these
strategies include improved local resource management as a key element of poverty reduction.
179. This project compliments at a regional level national policy objectives on the reduction of
poverty and improved rural livelihoods consistent with the PRSP, NEEDS and SEEDS program
enunciated by government. The project’s Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust and its focus on
engaging local comnmunities in biodiversity action planning and improved sustainable use is
fully consistent with the implementation of intent expressed in the PRSP, NEEDS, SEEDS and
LEEDS for poverty reduction through sustainable use.
180. The project is equally consistent with national priorities for the sustainable development
of the Niger Delta as enunciated in the workplan of the Ministry of Niger Delta and of the Niger
Delta Development Commission (NDDC), plans that operationalise the directives of the Niger
Delta Regional Master Plan and its derived Biodiversity Sector Report. Both policy documents
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
89
take into consideration not just the threats and impacts posed by the O&G sector, but also issues
of watershed management, use of forests, land degradation, coastal erosion, flood control,
climate change and their impact on biodiversity.
COUNTRY OWNERSHIP: COUNTRY ELIGIBILITY AND COUNTRY DRIVENNESS
181. Nigeria ratified the Convention on Biodiversity (CBD) in 199443 and the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) in July, 1975.
Nigeria has signed and/or ratified the African Convention on the Conservation of Nature and
Natural Resources; the Convention on Nature Protection and Wildlife Protection in the Western
Hemisphere; Agenda 21; the RAMSAR Convention on Wetlands of International Importance;
the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (ratified in 1975); United
Nations Convention on Law of the Seas (ratified in 1994); and International Convention on Oil
Pollution Preparedness, Responses and Cooperation (OPRC).
182. Nigeria was accepted as an Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI)
Candidate country on 27 September 2007 and submitted its final Validation Report to the EITI
Board on 29 June 2010. Former President Obasanjo committed to EITI in 2003 and launched
Nigeria EITI (NEITI) in 2004. To give legal backing to the work of NEITI, a bill was introduced
to the National Assembly in December 2004. This NEITI Act was passed into law on May 28,
2007.
SUSTAINABILITY AND REPLICABILITY
183. Sustainability: The design of all three Components takes into account the need for
sustainability. The design of the project seeks to strengthen existing information on biodiversity
in the Delta and improve its availability. This work under Component 1 will solidify and
improve the quality of data on the biodiversity in the Delta. This will in turn support over the
long term the development of better policies and programs to mainstream biodiversity
management objectives into the practices of the O&G sector. Component 1 also enhances
sustainability because it will strengthen the policy and institutional capacity baseline for
mainstreaming, an impact that will extend well beyond the lifespan of this project. Components 2
and 3 are designed to engage the O&G sector in mainstreaming as well as local communities,
without whom mainstreaming work in a place like the Delta will be impossible.
184. The social context of mainstreaming in the Niger Delta is an important, even critical
element for long-term sustainability of mainstreaming actions. Oil and gas operations and
biological diversity in the in the Delta exist in a densely populated water and landscape
characterized by intensive agricultural, forestry, and fisheries activities, in addition to O&G
operations. To date, resource management activities in the Niger Delta have been indifferent to
biodiversity conservation at best and at worst Nigeria’s O&G and natural resource policies
43
Nigeria signed in CBD in 1992 and ratified the CBD in 1994.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
90
provide disincentives for biodiversity conservation and sustainable use. However, many States
and the Federal Government in Nigeria are looking for new solutions to the age-old challenge of
sustainable rural development. The social sustainability of biodiversity mainstreaming will be
maximized when it clearly defines its role in achieving this goal. Social sustainability will be
based in part on: (i) the local benefits for local communities where they exist to be delivered by
the mainstreaming actions funded through the Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust (reduced erosion,
increased resilience to climate change created by healthier mangrove forests, improved quality of
local fisheries and sacred sites; and (ii) the overall positive perceptions of key stakeholders as to
the value of biodiversity in the Delta and the global community.
185. The project seeks to maximize ecological sustainability through its focus on the Delta
ecosystem as a whole as the strategic basis for mainstreaming biodiversity management
objectives into O&G laws, policies and company operations to ensure mainstreaming actions
consider the Delta’s ecological integrity and sustainability overall. The project’s strategy for
mainstreaming actions looks both “inside the fence” at O&G operations within their individual
concession areas (which are sometimes quite large) and “outside the fence,” which in this case
implies the whole Delta. In doing so, the project’s strategy will emphasize flexibility and the
importance of innovation in identifying priority areas methods for conserving them through
conservation or sustainable use. The project’s strategic approach calls for increasing the
ecological representation and ecosystem resilience of a system of State and community-based
protected or specially managed areas.
186. There is a tremendous amount of potential in Nigeria for improved financial
sustainability for biodiversity conservation through mainstreaming in the Delta using a
mechanism like the Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust. To be sure, funding for biodiversity
conservation in Nigeria has traditionally been so low – be it from the Federal or State
governments or from the O&G industry – that it can only improve going forward. Federal
government funding supports the basic operations of federal PA (of which there are none in the
Delta) and State government funding for State areas under special management (timber reserves
or wildlife areas) is extremely low as well. At the same time, however, the Federal Government
has established an enormous “Ecological Fund” funded through a direct earmark of 1-2% of the
Federal share of State revenue, which would make the Fund size in the hundreds of millions-tobillions of US$ (total amount not published). This is a significantly positive factor, which
illustrates the point that the long-term funding is there, if the logic of mainstreaming biodiversity
can compete with other pressing funding priorities.
187. The same situation is true for the Oil and Gas companies themselves in the Niger Delta:
the funding is there44 for well designed and structured biodiversity mainstreaming activities, if
they can be structured in such a way as to be “win-win-win” for the company, local communities
and biodiversity. Already, O&G companies are funding biodiversity-related activities, but these
activities. For example, Shell Petroleum Development Corporation funded and is funding
conservation projects focused on specific small areas of the Delta (refer e.g. to their co-financing
letter).
44
The O&G industry in the Niger Delta generates over US$50 billion/year.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
91
188. Replicability. The proposed project has high potential for replication; particularly its
second and third expected outcomes that will build and fund a new engagement mechanism for
the O&G companies, local communities and government to move forward with proactive
biodiversity mainstreaming work that also focuses on sustainable livelihoods. This mechanism
may be able to be replicated to other sectors in Nigeria but particularly to other countries with
emerging extractive industries to finance protection and conservation of biodiversity. The project
will facilitate replication by applying the following approach:
a. Introduce stakeholders to improved EIA management practices with focus on biodiversity or
approaches through workshops and local study tours;
b. Demonstrate new ideas, practices and technologies on the ground in each one of the project’s
three outcomes;
c. Identify and disseminate lessons learned and best practices to project partner institutions, and
through other relevant organizations such as IUCN, WWF and particularly the Convention
processes such as COPs and other meeting processes (UNCBD, RAMSAR and UNESCOMAB);
d. Train individuals from other sectors to expand the project’s main approaches to other areas
e.g. deal with threats and risks of offshore oil and gas exploration in the Gulf of Guinea.
PART III: Management Arrangements
IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS
189. UNDP will be the GEF Implementing Agency (IA). Given that the project is working at
the Federal level, across four Delta States and at the international level with more than six
international O&G companies and multiple international NGOs, UNDP will be the Executing
Agency under the Direct Execution Modality. This will provide for maximum flexibility in
achieving the rull range of project outcomes. The FMoE will be the lead government agency
under the project. The FMoE is the primary authority responsible for biodiversity conservation in
Nigeria. In its capacity of lead agency, the FMoE will be responsible for the supervision of the
project, providing joint approval of quarterly work plans and budgets at the national level.
190. FMoE is accountable to UNDP for the government’s participation in the project and
therefore will provide overall guidance and support to implementation of all project activities. It
will facilitate project implementation and ensure that internal monitoring and review systems are
in place. Qualified experts will be utilized when needed in accordance with UNDP rules and
procedures, and will facilitate interaction among relevant public organizations, research
institutions and private organizations. To achieve project objectives and produce required
outputs, the FMoE will partner with other stakeholders such as oil and gas industry players, other
government ministries and departments, local communities and NGOs. The Ministry of
Petroleum Resources will play an important role as member of the Steering Committee.
191. The (FMoE) will appoint a senior official as the National Project Director (NPD), who
will be the Representative of the FMoE and the Government to support the implementation of
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
92
the Project and be responsible for the achievement of its objectives. To actually coordinate and
implement the activities, the project will engage a Chief Technical Advisor for Mainstraming
(CTAM) co-funded by UNDP, and a National Team Leader (NTL). The CTAM and the NTL
will work in close collaboration with the NPD towards the achievement of the project outcomes
and objective. In order to support the realization of the specific outputs, the project will engage
short, medium and long-term consultants both nationally and internationally, as described in
Section IV - Part IV (‘Overview of Inputs from Technical Assistance Consultants’).
192. The project will be executed in accordance with UNDP-Nigeria’s direct execution
modalities (DEX). Within the proposed arrangement, the proceeds of the GEF grant will be
disbursed through the UNDP Country Office. UNDP-Nigeria will work with the UNDP-EEG
Regional Coordination, together with FMoE, to ensure timely delivery of project outputs and
outcomes. UNDP-Nigeria will also provide administrative and financial oversight of the
execution.
PROJECT OVERSIGHT
193. A Project Steering Committee (PSC) will provide oversight to project activities and it
will promote operational coordination among different government agencies, oil and gas industry
players, NGOs, communities and donors working in the sector. In agreement with the recently
endorsed program approach developed between UNDP and the GOM, all projects in the same
portfolio, such as environment in this case, are supervised by one unique steering committee, in
order to ensure:
a. Better coherence among all interventions in the same thematic area;
b. Better integration of all these interventions with national action plans coordinated by the
counterpart institutions;
c. Better synergy among these interventions, which in turn should improve coordination and
long-term impact;
d. A strengthened communication of project activities and expected results.
194. The major functions of this thematic [environment] steering committee are to revise and
approve the project work plans, assess the reported projects progress, conduct annual review of
projects, assess eventual implementation problems and guide necessary adjustments and approve
any strategic changes including budgets. This body meets twice a year or whenever extraordinary
meetings are deemed necessary. Membership of this PSC should be multi-disciplinary and multisectoral related to the implementation of this project and should include: UNDP-Nigeria, FMoE,
MND, Ministry of Petroleum Resources; two State MoE, two Oil Company representatives, one
NGO. The NTL will support the Secretariat of the PSC.
195. A Project Executive Committee (PEC) will be formed to provide day-to-day operational
project supervision. It will be composed of UNDP-Nigeria, the National Project Director (NPD),
the NTL, and the CTAM. The Ministry of Petroleum Resources and the Ministry of Niger Delta
may be called to join the PEC.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
93
196. A Consultative Group of sectoral specialists will also be formed and consulted by the
Project Steering Committee on specific issues. The group will enable a broader representation
than just the PSC at a high level of influence for the project. This group should include: experts
in law, in EIA process, in biodiversity, in O&G phases and work processes in Nigeria, key NGOs
operating in the Delta, O&G company representatives, media people. A series of consultative
workshops will be organized to present project strategies, obtain technical reviews and promote
information sharing between these participants.
197. In addition, working groups will be created during the implementation of the project.
These WGs will help guide the implementation, build consensus, share decisions and validate
process/results. Finally, the project will also work in close collaboration with related initiatives
funded by the GoN and several donors (see also Section IV - PART III: ‘Stakeholder
Involvement Plan’, and in particular Table 16 under it).
PROJECT MANAGEMENT
198. A National Team Leader (NTL) will coordinate the project together with a full-time
Chief Technical Advisor on Mainstreaming (CTAM). The NTL will manage the implementation
of the project. She/He will report to the PSC and will act under overall guidance from the UNDP
Focal Point on Energy and Environment. She/He will also liaise with the NDP and the FMoE.
The NTL will be responsible for project coordination and implementation, consolidation of work
plans and project papers, preparation of quarterly progress reports, reporting to the project
supervisory bodies, and supervising the work of the project experts and staff. The NTL will also
coordinate project activities with relevant government institutions.
199. The CTAM will be a full-time position (planned as a fixed-term appointment due to the
duration of 4 years at least) whose responsibility will be to provide senior technical guidance to
the project, to the NTL, and to other consultants on mainstreaming. Terms of Reference for both
the NTL and CTAM position is presented in Section IV - Part II of this document.
200. The NTL will be supported by an Administrative Assistant, who will be responsible for
the administration and finances of the project. A part time accountant will maintain the project’s
books. They will form the core of the project implementation unit together with a small team of
full-time national consultants. This project will have an office housed at the FMoE’s premises or
another appropriate location conducive to reduce transportation time and costs and also to build
synergies and linkages with other relevant initiatives underway in the Niger Delta.
201. The project will be managed using the UNDP tested adaptive management approach for
the implementation of UNDP and GEF funded projects. This approach translates into the ability
of the project management team to anticipate challenges through well-established risk
monitoring system and respond to challenges and opportunities in a flexible, positive and
optimizing manner. It is grounded on a set of simple rules:
a. GoN and UNDP/GEF approved the project document, which included the Goal, Objective and (3)
Outcomes. Any change to these expected results would necessitate their formal approval,
including the endorsement of these changes by the GEF CEO;
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
94
b. Project inputs and outputs may be adapted, dropped or added in response to current reality (after
approval by the PSC and UNDP/GEF;
c. Interactive decision-making is encouraged;
d. Risk monitoring should contribute to feedback and learning and it should improve decisions;
e. Embracing risk/uncertainty is also to build understanding.
202.
Audit Clause: Standard DEX audit procedures will be applied..
PART IV: Monitoring and Evaluation Plan and Budget
MONITORING AND REPORTING45
203. Project monitoring and evaluation will be conducted in accordance with established
UNDP and GEF procedures and will be provided by the project team and the UNDP Country
Office (UNDP-CO) with support from UNDP/GEF. The Project logframe (Project Results
Framework) in Section II - Part I provides performance and impact indicators for project
implementation along with their corresponding means of verification. These will form the basis
on which the project's Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) system will be built. The following
sections outline the principle components of the Monitoring and Evaluation Plan and indicative
cost estimates related to M&E activities. The project's Monitoring and Evaluation Plan will be
presented and finalized at the Project's Inception Report following a collective fine-tuning of
indicators, means of verification, and the full definition of project staff M&E responsibilities.
204.
The project will be monitored through the following M& E activities.
Inception Phase
205. A Project Inception Workshop will be held within the first 2 months of project start with
those with assigned roles in the project organization structure, UNDP country office and where
appropriate/feasible regional technical policy and programme advisors as well as other
stakeholders. The Inception Workshop is crucial to building ownership for the project results
and to plan the first year annual work plan.
206.
The Inception Workshop should address a number of key issues including:
a) Assist all partners to fully understand and take ownership of the project. Detail the
roles, support services and complementary responsibilities of UNDP CO and RCU
staff vis à vis the project team. Discuss the roles, functions, and responsibilities
within the project's decision-making structures, including reporting and
communication lines, and conflict resolution mechanisms. The Terms of Reference
for project staff will be discussed again as needed.
45
As per GEF guidelines, the project will also be using the BD 1 Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool (METT). New or
additional GEF monitoring requirements will be accommodated and adhered to once they are officially launched.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
95
b) Based on the project results framework and the relevant GEF Tracking Tool if
appropriate, finalize the first annual work plan. Review and agree on the indicators,
targets and their means of verification, and recheck assumptions and risks.
c) Provide a detailed overview of reporting, monitoring and evaluation (M&E)
requirements. The Monitoring and Evaluation work plan and budget should be
agreed and scheduled.
d) Discuss financial reporting procedures and obligations, and arrangements for annual
audit.
e) Plan and schedule Project Steering Committee meetings. Roles and responsibilities
of all project organization structures should be clarified and meetings planned. The
first Project Steering Committee meeting should be held within the first 12 months
following the inception workshop.
207. An Inception Workshop report is a key reference document and must be prepared and
shared with participants to formalize various agreements and plans decided during the meeting.
Quarterly
208. Progress made shall be monitored on a quarterly basis in the UNDP Enhanced Results
Based Management Platform. Based on the initial risk analysis submitted, the risk log shall
be regularly updated in ATLAS. Risks become critical when the impact and probability are
high. Based on the information recorded in Atlas, a Project Progress Reports (PPR) can be
generated in the Executive Snapshot. Other ATLAS logs can be used to monitor issues, lessons
learned etc. The use of these functions is a key indicator in the UNDP Executive Balanced
Scorecard.
Annually
209. Annual Project Review/Project Implementation Reports (APR/PIR): This key report is
prepared to monitor progress made since project start and in particular for the previous reporting
period (30 June to 1 July). The APR/PIR combines both UNDP and GEF reporting
requirements.
210.







The APR/PIR includes, but is not limited to, reporting on the following:
Progress made toward project objective and project outcomes - each with indicators,
baseline data and end-of-project targets (cumulative)
Project outputs delivered per project outcome (annual).
Lesson learned/good practice.
AWP and other expenditure reports
Risk and adaptive management
ATLAS QPR
Portfolio level indicators (i.e. GEF focal area tracking tools).
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
96
Periodic Monitoring through site visits
211. UNDP CO and the UNDP RCU will conduct visits to project sites based on the agreed
schedule in the project's Inception Report/Annual Work Plan to assess first hand project
progress. Other members of the Project Steering Committee may also join these visits. A Field
Visit Report/BTOR will be prepared by the CO and UNDP RCU and will be circulated no less
than one month after the visit to the project team and Project Steering Committee members.
Mid-term of project cycle
212. The project will undergo an independent Mid-Term Evaluation at the mid-point of project
implementation (June 2103). The Mid-Term Evaluation will determine progress being made
toward the achievement of outcomes and will identify course correction if needed. It will focus
on the effectiveness, efficiency and timeliness of project implementation; will highlight issues
requiring decisions and actions; and will present initial lessons learned about project design,
implementation and management.
Findings of this review will be incorporated as
recommendations for enhanced implementation during the final half of the project’s term. The
organization, terms of reference and timing of the mid-term evaluation will be decided after
consultation between the parties to the project document. The Terms of Reference for this Midterm evaluation will be prepared by the UNDP CO based on guidance from the Regional
Coordinating Unit and UNDP-GEF. The management response and the evaluation will be
uploaded to UNDP corporate systems, in particular the UNDP Evaluation Office Evaluation
Resource Center (ERC).
213. The relevant GEF Focal Area Tracking Tools (in this case the SO2 TT) will also be
completed during the mid-term evaluation cycle.
End of Project
214. An independent Final Evaluation will take place three months prior to the final Project
Steering Committee meeting and will be undertaken in accordance with UNDP and GEF
guidance. The final evaluation will focus on the delivery of the project’s results as initially
planned (and as corrected after the mid-term evaluation, if any such correction took place). The
final evaluation will look at impact and sustainability of results, including the contribution to
capacity development and the achievement of global environmental benefits/goals. The Terms of
Reference for this evaluation will be prepared by the UNDP CO based on guidance from the
Regional Coordinating Unit and UNDP-GEF. The Terminal Evaluation should also provide
recommendations for follow-up activities and requires a management response which should be
uploaded to PIMS and to the UNDP Evaluation Office Evaluation Resource Center. The
relevant GEF Focal Area Tracking Tools will also be completed during the final evaluation.
215. During the last three months, the project team will prepare the Project Terminal Report.
This comprehensive report will summarize the results achieved (objectives, outcomes, outputs),
lessons learned, problems met and areas where results may not have been achieved. It will also
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
97
lay out recommendations for any further steps that may need to be taken to ensure sustainability
and replicability of the project’s results.
Learning and knowledge sharing
216. Results from the project will be disseminated within and beyond the project intervention
zone through existing information sharing networks and forums. The project will identify and
participate, as relevant and appropriate, in scientific, policy-based and/or any other networks,
which may be of benefit to project implementation though lessons learned. The project will
identify, analyze, and share lessons learned that might be beneficial in the design and
implementation of similar future projects. Finally, there will be a two-way flow of information
between this project and other projects of a similar focus.
217.
The M& E budget is summarised in the table below.
Table 14: M&E Activities, Responsibilities, Budget and Time Frame
Type of M&E activity
Inception Workshop
Inception Report
Measurement of Means of
Verification for Project
Purpose Indicators
Measurement of Means of
Verification for Project
Progress and Performance
(measured annually)
ARR and PIR
Quarterly progress reports
CDRs
Issues Log
Risks Log
Lessons Learned Log
Mid-term Evaluation
Final Evaluation
PRODOC
Responsible Parties
Project Coordinator
UNDP CO
UNDP GEF
Project Team
UNDP CO
Project Manager will
oversee the contracting of
specific studies, and
delegate responsibilities to
relevant team members
Oversight by Project
Manager
Project team
Project Team
UNDP-CO
UNDP-GEF
Project team
Project Manager
Project Manager
UNDP CO Programme Staff
Project Manager
UNDP CO Programme Staff
Project Manager
UNDP CO Programme Staff
Project team
UNDP- CO
UNDP-GEF Regional
Coordinating Unit
External Consultants
Project team,
UNDP-CO
UNDP-GEF Regional
Budget US$
Excludes project staff
time
10,000
None
Time frame
Within first two months of
project start up
Immediately following IW
To be finalized in
Inception Phase and
Workshop. Indicative
cost: 15,000.
Start, mid and end of
project
Determined as part of the
Annual Work Plan
preparation. 8,000/yr;
total: 40,000
None
Annually prior to ARR/PIR
and to the definition of
annual work plans
None
None
None
Quarterly
Quarterly
Quarterly
None
Quarterly
None
Quarterly
40,000
At the mid-point of project
implementation.
40,000
At the end of project
implementation
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
Annually
98
Type of M&E activity
Terminal Report
Lessons learned
Audit
Responsible Parties
Coordinating Unit
External Consultants
Project team
UNDP-CO
Local consultant
Project team
UNDP-GEF Regional
Coordinating Unit (help re
best practice, etc.)
UNDP-CO
Project team
TOTAL indicative COST
Excludes project/UNDP staff time and travel expenses
Budget US$
Excludes project staff
time
0
Time frame
At least one month before
the end of the project
Yearly
15,000 (average 3,000
per year)
8,000
Yearly
US$ 168,000
PART V: Legal Context
218. This document together with the CPAP signed by the Government of Nigeria and UNDP
which is incorporated by reference constitute together a Project Document as referred to in the
Standard Basic Assistance Agreement (SBAA) and all CPAP provisions apply to this document.
219. Consistent with the Article III of the Standard Basic Assistance Agreement, the
responsibility for the safety and security of the implementing partner and its personnel and
property, and of UNDP’s property in the implementing partner’s custody, rests with the
implementing partner.
220. The implementing partner shall:
a) put in place an appropriate security plan and maintain the security plan, taking into
account the security situation in the country where the project is being carried;
b) assume all risks and liabilities related to the implementing partner’s security, and the full
implementation of the security plan.
221. UNDP reserves the right to verify whether such a plan is in place, and to suggest
modifications to the plan when necessary. Failure to maintain and implement an appropriate
security plan as required hereunder shall be deemed a breach of this agreement.
222. The implementing partner agrees to undertake all reasonable efforts to ensure that none
of the UNDP funds received pursuant to the Project Document are used to provide support to
individuals or entities associated with terrorism and that the recipients of any amounts provided
by UNDP hereunder do not appear on the list maintained by the Security Council Committee
established pursuant to resolution 1267 (1999). The list can be accessed via
http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/committees/1267/1267ListEng.htm. This provision must be included
in all sub-contracts or sub-agreements entered into under this Project Document.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
99
SECTION II: STRATEGIC RESULTS FRAMEWORK (SRF) AND GEF INCREMENT
PART I: Strategic Results Framework, SRF (formerly GEF Logical Framework) Analysis
INDICATOR FRAMEWORK AS PART OF THE SRF
Objective/
Outcome
Objective: To
mainstream
biodiversity
management
priorities into the
Niger Delta oil and
gas (O&G) sector
development policies
and operations.
Indicator
Baseline
Direct: Improved management of
600 km2) “inside the fence” of
O&G operations as measured by
adoption of Biodiversity Action
Plans for a target number of O&G
operations in the Delta.
No BAP for
operations in the Delta
Indirect: Threats to biodiversity
linked to O&G are reduced in a
spatial area of 46,420 km2 as
measured by condition, number or
extent of key species and
ecosystems in the Niger Delta:
- Area in ND where
Niger Delta red
colobus monkey is
unknown and unmeasured.
- Area in ND where Niger Delta
red colobus monkey is confirmed
- # of hectares of mangrove
ecosystem in under improved
special management regime
- # of hectares cover of barrier
island lowland forest under
protection.
# of O&G companies and
Government agencies utilizing
IBAT regularly for Niger Delta
biodiversity mainstreaming.
# of hectares of community
PA/set-aside or other PA gazetted
PRODOC
- Zero hectares of
mangrove ecosystem
in under improved
special management
regime
- Zero hectares cover
of barrier island
lowland forest under
protection.
End of Project
target
At least 600 km2 of
O&G footprint covered
by new or revised BAP
for O&G operations in
ND.
- Red colobus monkey
is confirmed present in
15,000 hectares by end
of project (EoP).
- At least 25,000 ha of
mangrove ecosystem in
under improved special
management regime
Risks and assumptions
Copies of the BAPs
themselves.
Risks:
Fluctuation in the global price of
oil may force O&G companies to
act short-sightedly.
Field surveys in first year of
project and in last.
Integrated Biodiversity
Assessment Tool for the
Niger Delta.
At least three O&G
companies and 3
Government agencies
by end of project.
Zero
At least 5,000 hectares
by end of project.
Government policies and
programs will support unrestrained
O&G development in the Niger
Delta, as world demand for oil
increases.
Bush meat trade may place too
much pressure on the Red colobus
monkey, hampering the ability of
the project to achieve this target.
Insecurity and violence in the
Niger Delta makes project
operations expensive and at times
impossible.
- At least 10,000 ha
cover of barrier island
lowland forest under
protection.
Zero
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
Source of Information
Field interviews; IBAT
subscription records; Policy
documents from government
calling for use of IBAT in
EIA process or other.
Gazette documentation. Field
visits
100
Assumption:
Despite some uncertainties, the
O&G sector in the Niger Delta
will continue to operate in a robust
manner, with new fields being
explored and increasing
production coming on line from
new O&G activities.
Objective/
Outcome
Indicator
and under biodiversity
management in four pilot States of
the Niger Delta.
Amount of funding committed to
the NDBT by EoP.
Baseline
Zero funding
committed.
Presence or absence of operational
Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust
mechanism and level of funding
committed.
Outcome 1 – The
governance
framework of law,
policy, and
institutional capacity
to enable the
mainstreaming of
biodiversity
management into the
O&G sector in the
Niger Delta is
strengthened.
PRODOC
End of Project
target
US$3 million
committed to the Trust
by EoP.
Source of Information
Risks and assumptions
Annual Project Reports
The designation of special
management status for mangroves
or barrier island lowland forest
will be backed up with real
management action and legal
protection.
Articles of incorporation
Investment statements for
Trust’s accounts.
Does not exist. No
funding committed to Niger Delta Biodiversity
any mechanism for
Trust (NDBT) Articles
Delta biodiversity
of Incorporation agreed
conservation/
upon by the GoN, O&G
mainstreaming
companies, and relevant
civil society partners
and legally approved
under Nigeria’s
Companies and Allied
Matters Act.
# of primary laws and policies and No laws/ policies have
At least four have
Actual guidelines and
regulations improved with
biodiversity
biodiversity
amendments
biodiversity mainstreaming
mainstreamed into
mainstreamed into their
guidelines, recommendations, and
them, including the
language via adopted Government gazettes
amendments.
EIA, EGASPIN, PIB,
guidelines,
announcing adoption of
and Oil Spill
amendments, or
amendment or guidelines.
Response Plan.
modified language in
the laws themselves.
Output 1.1 IBAT for the Niger Delta is in place and operational.
Output 1.2 Action Plan for Community-level Biodiversity Mainstreaming in the Niger Delta is developed and implemented.
Output 1.3. The biodiversity elements of legal and policy frameworks governing the O&G sector and its regulation are strengthened.
Output 1.4. The capacity of key Federal and State government agencies to assess and mitigate the risks and threats to biodiversity from the O&G sector in
the Niger Delta is strengthened.
# of central O&G policies and
Zero
At least three by end of EIA Policy (FMoE)
Risks:
guidelines and plans that
project.
EGASPIN (DPR)
Government policies and
incorporate biodiversity
National oil spill response
programs will support unrestrained
management checklists, criteria
plan (NOSDRA)
O&G development in the Niger
and objectives
Delta, as world demand for oil
increases.
Improvement in Score of UNDP
5 out of 48, i.e.
Improvement from 5/45 UNDP Capacity
Capacity Assessment Tool over
to minimum 10/48.
Development Scorecard may
Assumptions:
life of project.
be adapted for use as a
The GoN’s commitment to the
(see PRODOC Annex 1)
measurement tool
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
101
Objective/
Outcome
Indicator
# of measureable/ tangible
improvements in the EIA process
for biodiversity mainstreaming.
Baseline
EIA has few if any
specific biodiversity
conservation targets/
objectives.
Level of improvement of data
available through IBAT decision
support tool.
End of Project
target
Biodiversity
mainstreamed into EIA
process in at least 3
entry points.
(See PRODOC Matrix 1
under the description of
output 1.3)
Coverage of taxonomic
groups expanded to at
least four in total.
Source of Information
Risks and assumptions
Mid-term and final
independent evaluations will
validate the achievement of
this indicator.
project is demonstrated by its
participation in the EITI initiative,
by its ongoing and nearly
completed revision of the O&G
body of law and by the clear trend
evident in improving
environmental aspects of Nigerian
O&G law and policy in the past 10
year period.
Info on KBA
IBAT data sets.
available through
Project records
IBAT driven by one
Interviews with data partners.
taxa (birds).
Output 2.1. An agreed approach for O&G company Biodiversity Action Plans (BAPs) for the Niger Delta is achieved.
Outcome 2 –
Government, the
Output 2.2: A participatory process is instituted for the pilot demonstration of community-engagement in BAP for mainstreaming biodiversity management
O&G industry and
objectives into O&G project lifecycle.
local communities
Output 2.3: O&G BAPs are independently reviewed as a means to improve corporate biodiversity mainstreaming practices.
build and pilot new
Output 2.4. Niger Delta Biodiversity Mainstreaming Knowledge Management and Development Program is effective in informing mainstreaming
biodiversity action
practices in the Region.
planning tools for the Change in level of corporate
TBD
A 20% increase in
Voluntary reporting from
Risks:
proactive biodiversity investment in biodiversity
at project inception. corporate investment of O&G partner companies.
Companies may decide that
management in the
management.
O&G companies in
corporate investment of O&G
Niger Delta.
biodiversity
companies in biodiversity
management will ensure
management is privileged
biodiversity
information and not be willing to
safeguarding at O&G
make it public.
extraction sites, pipeline
and tanker
Assumptions:
transportation.
O&G operators will continue to
see biodiversity conservation and
# of O&G companies adopting
Zero
At least 3 companies
New BAP documents.
collaboration with local
new BAP for operations.
adopt model BAP for
communities and other
their inside the fence
stakeholders as a win-win for their
operations.
business model both on the local
and international levels.
Output 3.1. Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust legally established with a transparent management structure, to enable the efficient and transparent allocation of
Outcome 3
Stakeholders support resources to biodiversity conservation priorities in the Delta.
Output 3.2. NDB Trust Capitalization: Compacts with O&G companies to capitalize the Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust are successfully negotiated.
long-term
Output 3.3. Organized communities, partnerships of communities and NGOs, and NGOs and Government, Universities, in the Niger Delta at large have
biodiversity
the capacity to and count on an appropriate mechanism to access funding from the Trust.
management in the
Niger Delta by
Presence/absence of NDB Trust
No NDBT and
Niger Delta Biodiversity Funding commitments from
Risks:
capitalizing and
operational and funded with a first
minimal funding for Trust operational with at major O&G companies and
Fluctuation in the global price of
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
102
Objective/
Outcome
accessing the Niger
Delta Biodiversity
Trust as a
collaborative
engagement
mechanism for local
communities, O&G
companies and
Government at its
core.
Indicator
Baseline
tranche of US$ 3 million
supporting biodiversity
conservation in critical ecosystems
within the whole of the Niger
Delta Region
biodiversity in
general.
# of community proposed
biodiversity conservation projects
funded and operational in the four
pilot States of the Niger Delta.
Zero
End of Project
target
Source of Information
least US$3 million in
the Ecological Fund of the
funding supporting
Gov’t of Nigeria.
biodiversity
conservation in critical
ecosystems within the
whole of the Niger
Delta Region
At least 15 by end of
project.
Note: A detailed activity list and a chronogram of activities per output will be finalised upon project inception.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
103
Risks and assumptions
oil may force O&G companies to
act short-sightedly with respect to
investments and it make them less
likely to collaborate in the project
and capitalise the Niger Delta
Biodiversity Trust.
Assumption:
Increased awareness and capacity
will lead to a change in behaviour
by O&G operators with respect to
the mainstreaming of biodiversity
into their operations and a change
in behavior by local communities
and State government staff with
respect to conceptualizing and
implementing local biodiversity
conservation initiatives.
SECTION III: TOTAL BUDGET AND WORKPLAN
Award ID:
Project ID:
Award Title:
00061066
00077181
Business Unit:
Project Title:
Implementing Partner
(Executing Agency)
PIMS 2047 FSP Niger Delta Biodiversity
Project
Resp.
ATLAS
Party /
Fund
Donor Name
Budget
Impl.
ID
Code
Agent
DEX
62000
GEF-10003
71200
DEX
62000
GEF-10003
71300
1. Governance DEX
62000
GEF-10003
71400
framework for
DEX
62000
GEF-10003
71600
mainstreaming
DEX
62000
GEF-10003
72100
BD
DEX
62000
GEF-10003
74200
GEF Subtotal Atlas Activity 1 (Outcome 1)
TOTAL ACTIVITY 1 (Outcome 1)
DEX
62000
GEF-10003
71200
DEX
62000
GEF-10003
71300
DEX
62000
GEF-10003
71400
2. O&G
DEX
62000
GEF-10003
71600
industry and
community
DEX
62000
GEF-10003
72100
engagement
DEX
62000
GEF-10003
74200
DEX
62000
GEF-10003
74500
GEF Subtotal Atlas Activity 2 (Outcome 2)
TOTAL ACTIVITY 2 (Outcome 2)
DEX
62000
GEF-10003
71200
DEX
62000
GEF-10003
71300
DEX
62000
GEF-10003
71400
DEX
62000
GEF-10003
71600
3. Financial
DEX
62000
GEF-10003
72100
mechanism
NDCT
DEX
62000
GEF-10003
72200
DEX
62000
GEF-10003
74100
DEX
62000
GEF-10003
74200
GEF Subtotal Atlas Activity 3 (Outcome 3)
TOTAL ACTIVITY 3 (Outcome 3)
DEX
62000
GEF-10003
71400
DEX
62000
GEF-10003
71600
4. Project
DEX
62000
GEF-10003
74100
Management
DEX
62000
GEF-10003
74500
GEF Subtotal Atlas Activity 4 (Project Management)
GEF
Outcome/Atlas
Activity
PRODOC
Atlas Budget Description
International Consultants
Local Consultants
Contractual Services - Individ
Travel
Contractual Services-Companies
Audio Visual&Print Prod Costs
International Consultants
Local Consultants
Contractual Services - Individ
Travel
Contractual Services-Companies
Audio Visual&Print Prod Costs
Miscellaneous Expenses
International Consultants
Local Consultants
Contractual Services - Individ
Travel
Contractual Services-Companies
Equipment and Furniture
Professional Services
Audio Visual&Print Prod Costs
Contractual Services - Individ
Travel
Professional Services
Miscellaneous Expenses
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
NGA10
SPWA-Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
Federal Ministry of Environment and other partners
TOTAL
Amount
(USD)
Amount
Year 1
(USD)
144,000
176,000
116,000
30,000
651,000
50,000
1,167,000
1,167,000
102,000
196,000
90,000
56,000
410,000
50,000
4,500
908,500
908,500
72,000
20,000
14,000
80,000
650,000
52,500
135,000
150,000
1,173,500
1,173,500
331,000
12,000
13,500
4,500
361,000
104
Amount
Year 2
(USD)
Amount
Year 3
(USD)
28,800
35,200
23,200
6,000
130,200
28,800
35,200
23,200
6,000
130,200
28,800
35,200
23,200
6,000
130,200
223,400
223,400
20,400
39,200
18,000
11,200
82,000
900
171,700
171,700
14,400
4,000
2,800
16,000
130,000
30,000
5,000
223,400
223,400
20,400
39,200
18,000
11,200
82,000
25,000
900
196,700
196,700
14,400
4,000
2,800
16,000
130,000
10,000
5,000
202,200
202,200
66,200
2,400
2,700
900
72,200
182,200
182,200
66,200
2,400
2,700
900
72,200
223,400
223,400
20,400
39,200
18,000
11,200
82,000
25,000
900
196,700
196,700
14,400
4,000
2,800
16,000
130,000
2,500
60,000
150,000
379,700
379,700
66,200
2,400
2,700
900
72,200
Amount
Year 4
(USD)
Amount
Year 5
(USD)
28,800
35,200
23,200
6,000
130,200
50,000
273,400
273,400
20,400
39,200
18,000
11,200
82,000
28,800
35,200
23,200
6,000
130,200
900
171,700
171,700
14,400
4,000
2,800
16,000
130,000
10,000
5,000
900
171,700
171,700
14,400
4,000
2,800
16,000
130,000
182,200
182,200
66,200
2,400
2,700
900
72,200
227,200
227,200
66,200
2,400
2,700
900
72,200
223,400
223,400
20,400
39,200
18,000
11,200
82,000
60,000
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
4
10
11
12
13
14
15
4
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
Resp.
ATLAS
Party /
Fund
Donor Name
Budget
Atlas Budget Description
Impl.
ID
Code
Agent
DEX
04000 UNDP TRAC - 00012
71400
Contractual Services - Individ
DEX
04000 UNDP TRAC - 00012
71600
Travel
DEX
04000 UNDP TRAC - 00012
72100
Contractual Services-Companies
TRAC Subtotal Atlas Activity 4 (Project Management)
TOTAL ACTIVITY 4 (Project Management)
GEF
Outcome/Atlas
Activity
TOTAL
Amount
(USD)
Amount
Year 1
(USD)
Amount
Year 2
(USD)
Amount
Year 3
(USD)
Amount
Year 4
(USD)
Amount
Year 5
(USD)
945,000
10,000
45,000
1,000,000
1,361,000
210,000
2,000
10,000
222,000
294,200
210,000
2,000
25,000
237,000
309,200
210,000
2,000
10,000
222,000
294,200
210,000
2,000
105,000
2,000
212,000
284,200
107,000
179,200
3,610,000
1,000,000
669,500
222,000
674,500
237,000
872,000
222,000
699,500
212,000
694,500
107,000
4,610,000
891,500
911,500
1,094,000
911,500
801,500
24
25
26
.
SUB-TOTAL GEF
SUB-TOTAL UNDP TRAC
.
GRAND TOTAL (in cash)
Budget Notes
1
International consultants: (1) Expert on operationalizing the IBAT (8 weeks); (2) Expert on Biodiversity Conservation Planning with an emphasis on mainstreaming (10
weeks); (3) Legal expert on incorporating biodiversity objectives into law/policy/regulatory frameworks (10 weeks); (4) Mainstreaming capacity Assessment and Training
Programme Development Expert (20 weeks).
2
Local short-term consultants: (1) ND-IBAT Working Group (5 members x 16 weeks); (2) Working group to strengthen biodiversity elements of legal and policy frameworks
(1 or 2 legal experts; 1 or 2 biodiversity experts; 1 process/regulatory expert - i.e. 4 members x 16 weeks); (3) Two capacity self-assessment/training experts to work with int'l
experts (2 x 16 weeks)
3
Project team: (1) National long-term consultant: biodiversity mainstreaming capacity building (2 years); (2) National Team Leader 's (NTL) technical input to strategic policy
and planning (~46 weeks).
4
International travel to field int. cons. and domestic travel in connection with project activities under this component
5
I) Contractual Services: (1) Maintain and operationalize IBAT and conduct biodiversity hotspot assessment of the Niger Delta ($ 90k); (2) Develop Niger Delta-specific
portal to IBAT with more detailed information ($ 90K)
II) Meetings, workshops, trainings and consultations: (1) Niger Delta Biodiversity Symposium as part of the Action Planning process ($ 10K); (2) Niger Delta Nature
Leadership Training Programme ($ 220K); (3) Three summer internships each year for three years ($ 90K); (4) Inception workshop ($ 61K)
6
Publications: Biodiversity of Niger Delta Book ($ 50K)
7
International consultants: (1) Biodiversity Action Planning Expert in International Best Practice/O&G practice (10 weeks); (2) O&G expert Independent Reviewer of BAP (6
weeks/year for 4 years).
8
Local consultants: (1) Working group to draft Action Plan to Operationalize the Biodiersity Sector Report (3 members x 16 weeks); (2)
(2) Working group for development of model BAP Guide for Niger Delta (2 people each x 12 weeks); (3) Team Leader of the Working group for development of model BAP
Guide for Niger Delta (20 weeks); (4) Working group for independent review of O&G BAPs (2 experts working with international expert 8 weeks/year for 4 years); (5)
Conservation fund national legal expert (40 weeks).
9
Project team: (1) NTL's technical input to pilot work to institutional strengthening (38 weeks).; (2) NTL's technical input (57 weeks)
10
I) Contractual Services: (1) Stakeholder engagement plan development and implementation under Output 2.2 (An agreed approach for O&G company Biodiversity Action
Plans (BAPs) for the Niger Delta is achieved.); (2) Produce biodiversity update for NOSDRA's oil spill response contingency plan; (3) Write a compendium of biodiversity
solutions for mainstreaming into the O&G sector.
II) Meetings, workshops, trainings and consultations: (1) Meetings/workshops for Model BAP Guide Development ($ 35K); (2) Meetings of O&G staff regarding BAP
improvement/elaboration (10k/year = 50k); (3) Knowledge management/Training module development in connection with output 3.3 (Organized communities, partnerships
of communities and NGOs, and NGOs and Government, Universities, in the Niger Delta at large have the capacity to and count on an appropriate mechanism to access
funding from the Trust.)
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
105
Budget Notes
11
Publications: Compendium of Biodiversity solutions and Training modules printed and made available on the web ($ 50k).
12
Misc: Bank charges, insurance and other miscellaneous expenditures
13
International consultants: Environmental Fund Expert for NDBT (24 weeks)
14
Local consultants: Conservation fund working group 2 GEF paid consultants (2 x 10 weeks)
15
Project team: Project Assistant technical input (0.5 years).
16
I) Contractual Services: (1) Community-based mainstreaming project development enablers; (2) Web-site designer for Project/NDBT website with special features for easy
access by low-bandwidth connections from cell phones, etc. ($ 120K); (3) Filling IBAT data gaps and creating new portal for ND IBAT ($ 80K); (4) Funding of pilot
community-based mainstreaming projects under NDBT ($ 120K).
II) Meetings, workshops, trainings and consultations: (1) Peer to peer training in connection with output 3.3 (Organized communities, partnerships of communities and
NGOs, and NGOs and Government, Universities, in the Niger Delta at large have the capacity to and count on an appropriate mechanism to access funding from the Trust.)
($ 45K); (2) Training field visits and project closing workshop ($ 25); (3) Peer to peer training on mainstreaming in O&G ($ 110K); (4) Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust
Strategic Planning Process stakeholder meetings (4 delta states, Abuja, Lagos) ($ 100K).
17
IT equipment and furniture: (1) Acquisition of Laptops (7 @ $ 2000), software licenses (7 @ $ 800), portable hard drive (2 @ $ 200), printer w/ cartridge (2 @ $ 300), data
projector (1 @ $ 1000) and mobile phone contracts (7 @ $ 250) and other peripherals, e.g. GPS, laser printer, copy-machine (@ $ 2150) for project team, (2) Office furniture
($ 5K).; Equipment for communities: Hand-held GPS units for Community-based monitoring and BAP. ($ 22K)
18
Professional services: (1) Audit ($ 25K); (2) Evaluations - mid-term and final (may be contracted out to a consultancy outfit)
19
Publications: (1) Guidelines for mainstreaming biodiversity conservation objectives into O&G practice ($ 30k) Compendium of biodiversity solutions to O&G threats ($
40K);(3) Online NDBT platform and content production and maintenance ($ 80k)
20
Project core: (1) National Team Leader (NTL) admin responsibilities (~45% of time or 2.2 years); (2) Project Assistant admin input (4 years); (3) Accountant (4 years).
21
Management-related domestic travel
22
MOSS compliance contribution and general costs.
23
Communication costs (mgt related)
24
Project core: Chief Technical Adviser on mainstreaming (CTAM) - proforma costs FTA L4 (4.5 years)
25
Domestic travel for the CTAM
26
Consultancy outfit to be contracted for rendering management services for up-stating the NDBT in connection with Outputs 3.1. (Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust legally
established with a transparent management structure, to enable the efficient and transparent allocation of resources to biodiversity conservation priorities in the Delta) and
3.2. (NDB Trust Capitalization: Compacts with O&G companies to capitalize the Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust are successfully negotiated).
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
106
SECTION IV: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
PART I: Other agreements
CO-FINANCING LETTERS
Name of Co-financier
Federal Ministry of Environment
Date
Type
Co-financing amounts
in USD
in-kind
3,150,000
in cash
3,000,000
in-cash
2,000,000
in-kind
1,500,000
in-cash
1,000,000
04-Nov-10
Shell Petroleum Development Company
of Nigeria Ldt.
10-Dec-10
UNDP Nigeria
02-Nov-10
TOTAL
10,650,000
Note: A new letter from the Federal Ministry of Environment dated 17 March 2011 has been
added, in order to provide more detail on the government’s co-financing to the project.
-- See separate file—
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
107
PART II: Terms of References for key project staff
NATIONAL TEAM LEADER
Background
National Team Leader (NTL), will be a locally recruited national selected based on an open
competitive process. He/She will be responsible for the overall management of the project,
including the mobilization of all project inputs, supervision over project staff, consultants and
sub-contractors. The NTL will report to the UNDP-Nigeria Environment Department Director in
close consultation with the UNDP RR (or duly designated UN officer) for all of the project’s
substantive and administrative issues. From the strategic point of view of the project, the NTL
will report on a periodic basis to the Project Steering Committee (PSC). Generally, the NTL will
be responsible for meeting government obligations under the project, under the national
execution modality (NEX). He/She will perform a liaison role with the Government, UNDP and
other UN Agencies, NGOs and project partners, and maintain close collaboration with other
donor agencies providing co-financing.
Duties and Responsibilities
 Supervise and coordinate the production of project outputs, as per the project document;
 Mobilize all project inputs in accordance with UNDP procedures for nationally executed
projects;
 Supervise and coordinate the work of all project staff, consultants and sub-contractors;
 Coordinate the recruitment and selection of project personnel;
 Prepare and revise project work and financial plans, as required by Project Director and
UNDP;
 Liaise with UNDP, FMoE, relevant government agencies, and all project partners,
including donor organizations and NGOs for effective coordination of all project
activities;
 Facilitate administrative backstopping to subcontractors and training activities supported
by the Project;
 Oversee and ensure timely submission of the Inception Report, Combined Project
Implementation Review/Annual Project Report (PIR/APR), Technical reports, quarterly
financial reports, and other reports as may be required by UNDP, GEF, DGA and other
oversight agencies;
 Disseminate project reports and respond to queries from concerned stakeholders;
 Report progress of project to the steering committees, and ensure the fulfilment of
steering committees directives.
 Oversee the exchange and sharing of experiences and lessons learned with relevant
community based integrated conservation and development projects nationally and
internationally;
 Ensures the timely and effective implementation of all components of the project;
 Assist community groups, municipalities, NGOs, staff, students and others with
development of essential skills through training workshops and on the job training
thereby upgrading their institutional capabilities;
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
108


Coordinate and assists scientific institutions with the initiation and implementation of all
field studies and monitoring components of the project
Carry regular, announced and unannounced inspections of all sites and the activities of
the project site management units.
Qualifications
 A university degree (MS or PhD) in Management or Environmental Sciences;
 At least 10 years of experience in natural resource management or project/programme
management;
 At least 5 years of project/programme management experience;
 Working experiences with ministries and national institutions in Nigeria is a plus, but not
a requirement;
 Ability to effectively coordinate a large, multi-stakeholder project;
 Ability to administer budgets, train and work effectively with counterpart staff at all
levels and with all groups involved in the project;
 Strong drafting, presentation and reporting skills;
 Strong computer skills, in particular mastery of all applications of the MS Office package
and internet search;
 Strong knowledge about Nigeria’s and the Niger Delta’s political and socio-economic
context, in particular at National and Municipal level;
 Excellent writing and communication skills in English.
CHIEF TECHNICAL ADVISER ON MAINSTREAMING (CTAM)
Background
The Chief Technical Adviser on Mainstreaming (CTAM) will be responsible for providing
overall technical backstopping to the Project. He/She will render technical support to the
National Team Leader (NTL), staff and other government counterparts. The CTAM will
coordinate the provision of the required technical inputs, reviewing and preparing Terms of
Reference and reviewing the outputs of consultants and other sub-contractors. The CTAM will
be an experienced expatriate. He/She will report to the UNDP Environment Unit Director and
will deputize the National Team Leader (NTL) in his/hers admin responsibilities.
Duties and Responsibilities
 Provide technical and strategic assistance for project activities, including planning,
monitoring and site operations, and assuming quality control of interventions;
 Provide hands-on support to the NTL, project staff and other government counterparts in
the areas of project management and planning, management of site activities, monitoring,
and impact assessment;
 Finalize Terms of Reference for consultants and sub-contractors, and assist in the
selection and recruitment process;
 Coordinate the work of all consultants and sub-contractors, ensuring the timely delivery
of expected outputs, and effective synergy among the various sub-contracted activities;
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
109







Assist the NTL in the preparation and revision of the Management Plan as well as Annual
Work Plans;
Coordinate preparation of the periodic Status Report when called for by the National
Team Leader;
Assist the NTL in the preparation of the Combined Project Implementation
Review/Annual Project Report (PIR/APR), inception report, technical reports, quarterly
financial reports for submission to UNDP, the GEF, other donors and Government
Departments, as required;
Assist in mobilizing staff and consultants in the conduct of a mid-term project evaluation,
and in undertaking revisions in the implementation program and strategy based on
evaluation results;
Assist the National Team Leader in liaison work with project partners, donor
organizations, NGOs and other groups to ensure effective coordination of project
activities;
Document lessons from project implementation and make recommendations to the
Steering Committee for more effective implementation and coordination of project
activities; and
Perform other tasks as may be requested by the NTL, Steering Committee and other
project partners.
Qualifications
 University education (MS or PhD) with expertise in the area of biodiversity and
mainstreaming and the oil and gas sector, or other extractive industries in general;
 At least 15 years of professional experience, of which at least eight are at international
level
 Strong skills in monitoring and evaluation and experience in implementing environmental
projects;
 Previous experience with GEF projects, particularly the results-based management
approach, is an added plus;
 Ability to effectively coordinate a large, multidisciplinary team of experts and
consultants;
 Be an effective negotiator with excellent oral and presentation skills;
 Excellent writing skills in English.
OVERVIEW OF INPUTS FROM TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CONSULTANTS
Table 15: Overview of Inputs from Technical Assistance Consultants
Consultant
Time
Local / National contracting
ND-IBAT working
16 weeks
group (5 members, 16
weeks ea)
Tasks and Relevance to Outcome/Output
WG to Draft Action
Plan to Implement
Outcome 1, Output 1.2 . Tasked with elaborating an Action Plan to identify priority
mainstreaming activities to improve management of biodiversity in the Delta in the four
PRODOC
16 weeks
years
Outcome 1, Output 1.1. Tasked with elaborating and implementing a program to make
the IBAT platform for the Niger Delta more useful in decision support for its primary
users in mainstreaming biodiversity into O&G laws, policies, plans and operations.
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
110
Consultant
Biodiversity Sector
Report (3 members,
16 wks)
Time
Working Group on
Law/Policy
Strengthening (4
members, 16 wks
each)
Capacity Assessment
& Training Experts, 2
@16 wks each.
Biodiversity
mainstreaming
capacity building (2 @
38 weeks each)
Working Group for
Model BAP Guide (2
@ 12 weeks)
64 weeks
Community-based
mainstreaming BAP
facilitators (4 @ 30
wks each)
Independent Review
Team for O&G BAPS
(2 @ 8 wks/year, 4
years)
120
weeks
Conservation Fund
Design Legal Expert
40
Conservation Fund
working group (2 @
10 wks each)
20 weeks
Web-site designer
40
32 weeks
76 weeks
24 weeks
64 weeks
Tasks and Relevance to Outcome/Output
pilot states. With a focus on the O&G sector-related threats and barriers to
mainstreaming, the action plan will identify critical biodiversity areas where (a) energy
development is to be avoided altogether; (b) energy projects are allowed, but should
have mitigation measures; and (c) restoration is needed.
Outcome 1, Output 1.3. Tasked to review and update the existing O&G sectoral
guidelines for EIA in Nigeria. Specific, detailed updates will be made that incorporate
biodiversity conservation objectives into the process will be made in close consultation
with the FMoE and SMoEs.
Tasked with working with an international expert in biodiversity and training needs
assessment regarding mainstreaming issues in the four pilot Delta States and within two
federal Ministries. Outcome 1, Output 1.4
Tasked with designing Niger Delta Biodiversity Leadership Programme and overseeing
its implementation, drawing upon best practice world-wide, including key expertise in
central areas of importance identified by the capacity assessment. Outcome 1, Output
1.4
Tasked with elaborating “A guide to developing biodiversity action plans for the O&G
sector,” the working group will be convened under the auspices of FMoE/DPR. Based
on the IPIECA Oct 2005 guide “which is widely adopted by the industry, an immediate
project activity will be to produce an updated, revised guide focused on the Niger Delta.
Will work closely with and under the guidance of the int’l expert in BAP. Outcome 2,
Output 2.1.
These facilitators will be tasked with working jointly with O&G company partners and
local communities in pilot partnership areas to help communities elaborate BAPs that
carry forward specific elements of 1 or more O&C company BAPs in a specific
geographic area. These BAP will then be presented to the NDBT for funding.
Independent Review Team for the O&G company BAPs tasked with reviewing The
BAPs and empowered to propose how to strengthen these new plans and actions and to
help identify biodiversity opportunities rather than increase risk. They would advise the
company on biodiversity opportunities both ‘inside’ and ‘outside the fence.’ Outcome 2,
Output 2.3
Will advise the international expert on conservation fund design as to the Nigerian legal
context and best legal foundation for a Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust. Will advise on
design parameters, ideal institutional structure, and how to maintain and ensure
transparency. Outcome 3, Output 3.1
Tasked with conducting a strategic planning process and elaborating a detailed proposal
for establishing the Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust. The working group will work
closely with and under the supervision of an international conservation fund expert.
Outcome 3, Output 3.1, 3.2.
Will design the project and NDBT website. Will be tasked with making it interactive
and importantly, accessible by people using mobile technology (i.e. most local
communities around the Delta). Will require some innovating above and beyond the
normal website design task.
Discretionary weeks to be used per recommendation of NTL and approval of SC.
National Consultant
15
time (discretionary)
International / Regional and global contracting
Chief Technical
Advisor on
Mainstreaming
IBAT Strengthening
Expert
Biodiversity action
planning expert
PRODOC
104
See ToR above.
8
Outcome 1, Output 1, Activities 1, 2. Provide international expertise and best practice
guidance to structuring and implementing work under this Output and related activities.
Outcome 1, Output 1.2 . Tasked with structuring and overseeing the process and the
working group of Nigerian experts to elaborate an Niger Delta Biodiversity Action Plan
10
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
111
Consultant
Time
Legal Expert on
Mainstreaming
Biodiversity into
O&G law/policy
10
Capacity assessment
expert for
mainstreaming
20
BAP Development
Expert
10 weeks
O&G expert and
Independent BAP
Reviewer
24 weeks
Environmental Fund
Design Expert
24 weeks
Tasks and Relevance to Outcome/Output
to improve management of biodiversity in the Delta in the four pilot states.
Outcome 1, Output 1.3. Tasked with structuring and overseeing the process and the
working group of Nigerian experts to review and update the existing O&G sectoral
guidelines for EIA in Nigeria. Specific, detailed updates will be made that incorporate
biodiversity conservation objectives into the process will be made in close consultation
with the FMoE /SMoEs/DPR and other relevant organizations.
Tasked with structuring and overseeing the process and the working group of Nigerian
experts to conduct a biodiversity and training needs assessment regarding mainstreaming
issues in the four pilot Delta States and within two federal Ministries. Outcome 1,
Output 1.4.
Tasked with structuring and overseeing the process and the working group of Nigerian
experts to elaborate “A guide to developing biodiversity action plans for the O&G
sector,” under the auspices of FMoE/DPR. Based on the IPIECA Oct 2005 guide “which
is widely adopted by the industry, an immediate project activity will be to produce an
updated, revised guide focused on the Niger Delta. The expert will be responsible for
writing and finalizing the guide. Outcome 2, Output 2.1.
Tasked with structuring and leading the Independent Review Team in working closely
with O&G company partners to review O&G company BAPs. The team will be
empowered to propose how to strengthen these new plans and actions and to help
identify biodiversity opportunities rather than increase risk. They would advise the
company on biodiversity opportunities both ‘inside’ and ‘outside the fence.’ Outcome 2,
Output 2.3
Tasked with leading the effort to propose and establish the NDBT. Will oversee a
Nigerian expert working in elaborating a proposal describing the background and
justification for establishing a Trust to support the conservation of the Niger Delta’s
globally significant biological diversity. The Proposal will describe the Trust’s legal and
organizational structure, and elaborate mechanisms that will ensure its transparent
management and its ability to serve as an impactful financing mechanism for
biodiversity conservation in the Delta.
PART III: Stakeholder Involvement Plan
223. The PPG phase included consultations with the project’s key stakeholders at the national
and local levels. Stakeholder visits were carried out in the four Delta states as well as Lagos, the
commercial capital of Nigeria and the center of the O&G industry. State authorities and and
NGOs participated in consultations with PPG consultants and in two workshops at the national
level were also held and the project was thoroughly discussed. In addition, several bilateral
meetings were held, mostly with donors and key stakholders who could not attend the
workshops. Project preparation was a highly participatory process, in line with UNDP’s and
GEF’s requirements.
224. Table 4 contains a thorough analysis of stakeholders and indications on how they will be
involved in the project. More specifically for O&G partners, an analysis of these players has
been carried out during the PPG phase and an industry engagement plan developed. These are
rather thorough and can be found in Annex 4. O&G partners in the project will be engaged first
and foremost through the Oil Production Trade Sector (OPTS) from the Lagos Chamber of
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
112
Commerce, which plays a catalytic and decision making role on policies for these corporate
partners.
225. A more detailed Stakeholder Involvement Plan will be prepared upon project inception
and this is already an identified activity. Else, the project is expected to collaborate with a
number of programmes and inititatives active in the Niger Delta and elsewhere in Nigeria and
which are relevant for the project. These are summarised in the table below.
Table 16: Coordination and collaboration between project and related initiatives
INITIATIVES /
HOW COLLABORATION WITH THE PROJECT WILL BE ENSURED
INTERVENTIONS
UNEP – Environmental UNDP is a co-implementor of the Ogoniland UNEP project, being
Assessment of
responsible for logistics and administrative support. This project’s office may
Ogoniland (EAO)
be located in the compound established for the Ogoniland project, which will
be in transition during 2011. Therefore, specific areas of collaboration are
difficult to elaborate at this time, since the EAO project will be formally
completed. However, this project has learned a good deal from Ogoniland’s
community engagement approach and these lessons have been and will be
incorporated into this project’s approach. In addition, thanks to the EAO
project, communities in Ogoniland will be well prepared to work with this
project and they will be among the first communities to have at least one
pilot NDBT project Biodiversity Action Planning process at the community
level under the Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust.
UNDP Local
The project is working in Bayelsa State, one of this project’s 4 pilot states.
Development
The project’s main objectives are to test local participatory planning
Programme
procedures, assisting and establishing ward development committees, and
creating link between them, the LGA and the State. It is also piloting a local
development fund. This project will work together with the LDP to identify
model communities where this project can build upon the planning and
community-based mechanisms put in place by the LDP.
SIP - Scaling up
Sustainable Land
Management Practice,
Knowledge, and
Coordination
(FADAMA III)
This project is working in all 30+ states of Nigeria. Rural land use planning
support packages in 60 local governments (2 in each of 30 States) including:
(i) Training, (ii) GIS equipment (iii) development of rural land use plans.
This process will be very relevant to the project’s work with local
communities to elaborate community BAPs for collaboration with O&G and
Government partners. This project will work with SIP to identify well
prepared communities with whom the project could work.
PIND
PIND Foundation has structured its activities in four programs:
Foundation for
 Economic Development aimed at generating sustainable economic
Partnership Initiatives in
opportunities for micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises.
the Niger Delta.
 Capacity Building that strengthens institutions including local, state, and
federal government agencies and civil society orgs.
Chevron
 Peace-building that nurtures stability in vulnerable communities.
 Analysis and Advocacy to promote understanding of the barriers and
www.pindfoundation.net
enablers of economic growth and poverty reduction in the Niger Delta.
PINDS program is an ideal “baseline” co-funding partner for this project’s
NDBT and consultations will be held to reach a collaborative agreement to
this effect.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
113
PROJECT ANNEXES
Annex 1. Capacity Development Scorecard
This capacity assessment is based on an independent and adapted application of the methodology
contained in the recent publication GEF/UNDP/UNEP (2010): Monitoring guidelines of
Capacity Development in GEF operations. Capacity Development Initiative, Global Support
Programme, National Capacity Self-Assessment.46
The FMoE, NESREA, NOSDRA have been the focus of the assessment with respect to their
capacity, as well as of other relevant agencies, to mainstream biodiversity management priorities
into their regulatory and oversight role with respect to the Niger Delta’s O&G sector.
Capacity is defined by UNDP as “the ability of individuals, institutions and societies to perform
functions, solve problems and set and achieve objectives in a sustainable manner”47. In line with
it and with the GEF’s approach to capacity, three levels of capacity are at evaluated:
a) At the individual level, capacity development refers to the process of changing
attitudes and behaviors, most frequently through imparting knowledge and developing
skills through training. However it also involves learning by doing, participation,
ownership, and processes associated with increasing performance through changes in
management, motivation, morale, and improving accountability and responsibility.
b) Capacity development at the organizational level focuses on overall performance and
functioning capabilities, such as developing mandates, tools, guidelines and management
information systems to facilitate and catalyze organizational change. At the
organizational level, capacity development aims to develop a set of constituent
individuals and groups, as well as to strengthen links with its environment.
c) At the systemic level, capacity development is concerned with the “enabling
environment”, i.e., the overall policy, economic, regulatory, and accountability
frameworks within which organizations and individuals operate. Relationships and
processes between organizations, both formal and informal, as well as their mandates, are
important.
The results are presented below. These will be tracked again, using the same methodology at the
project’s mid-term and by the end of the project in connection with the due evaluations.
46
47
See http://ncsa.undp.org
UNDP (2006): Capacity Assessment Practice Note. UNDP-CDG.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
114
Capacity Result/Indicator
Indicator range
Rating
Score
Capacity Result 1: Capacities for Engagement.
[Total possible Score = 9]
1
Relevant individuals and organizations (resource users, owners, consumers, community and political leaders, private
and public sector managers and experts) engage proactively and constructively with one another in managing a
global environmental issue.
Organizational responsibilities for
mainstreaming biodiversity are not
0
0
clearly defined.
Organizational responsibilities for
mainstreaming biodiversity are
1
Indicator 1.1 – Degree of legitimacy/mandate of
identified.
lead environmental organizations: this indicator
measures if the lead organizations are identified for
Authority and legitimacy of all lead
mainstreaming in the O&G sector, if their respective
organizations responsible for
2
responsibilities are clearly defined and if the
mainstreaming biodiversity are partially
authority of these organizations is recognized.
recognized by stakeholders.
Authority and legitimacy of all lead
organizations responsible for
3
mainstreaming biodiversity recognized
by stakeholders.
No co-management mechanisms are in
0
place
Some co-management mechanisms are
1
1
in place and operational
Indicator 1.2 – Existence of operational comanagement mechanisms: this indicator measures
Some co-management mechanisms are
the existence of public and private co-management
formally established through MOUs and
2
mechanisms and if these mechanisms are functional.
other agreements
Comprehensive co-management
mechanisms are formally established
3
and are operational/functional
Identification of stakeholders and their
participation /involvement in
0
0
management decision-making is poor
Stakeholders are identified but their
Indicator 1.3 – Existence of cooperation among
participation in management decision1
stakeholder groups: this indicator measures the
making is limited
involvement of stakeholders, their identification, the
Stakeholders are identified and regular
establishment of stakeholder consultation processes
consultations mechanisms are
2
and the active contribution of these stakeholders to
established
decision-making.
Stakeholders are identified and they
actively contribute to established
3
participative management decisionmaking processes
Capacity Result 2: Capacities to generate, access
[Total possible Score = 15]
1
and use information and knowledge
Individuals and organizations have the skills and knowledge to research, acquire, communicate, educate and make
use of pertinent information to be able to diagnose and understand global environmental problems and potential
solutions.
Indicator 2.1 – Degree of environmental awareness Stakeholders are not aware about global
of stakeholders: this indicator measures the level of
environmental issues and their related
0
0
awareness of stakeholders about global
possible solutions (MEAs)
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
115
Capacity Result/Indicator
Indicator range
environmental issues and the solutions being
implemented and their possibility to participate in the
implementation of these solutions.
Stakeholders are aware about global
environmental issues but not about the
possible solutions (MEAs)
Stakeholders are aware about global
environmental issues and the possible
solutions but do not know how to
participate.
Stakeholders are aware about global
environmental issues and are actively
participating in the implementation of
related solutions.
The environmental information needs
are not identified and the information
management infrastructure is inadequate
The environmental information needs
are identified but the information
management infrastructure is inadequate
The environmental information is
partially available and shared among
stakeholders but is not covering all focal
areas and/or the information
management infrastructure to manage
and give information access to the public
is limited
Comprehensive environmental
information is available and shared
through an adequate information
management infrastructure
Traditional knowledge is ignored and
not taken into account into relevant
participative decision-making processes
Traditional knowledge is identified and
recognized as important but is not
collected and used in relevant
participative decision-making processes
Traditional knowledge is collected but is
not used systematically into relevant
participative decision-making processes
Traditional knowledge is collected, used
and shared for effective participative
decision-making processes
No environmental education
programmes are in place
Environmental education programmes
are partially developed and partially
delivered
Environmental education programmes
are fully developed but partially
delivered
Comprehensive environmental education
programmes exist and are being
delivered
Indicator 2.2 – Access and sharing of
environmental information by stakeholders: this
indicator measures the information needs, if they are
identified, the adequacy of the information
management infrastructure in place and the sharing
of this information.
Indicator 2.3 – Extent of inclusion/use of
traditional knowledge in environmental decisionmaking: this indicator measures if the traditional
knowledge is being explored, if the sources of
traditional knowledge are identified, captured and
shared among stakeholders for effective participative
decision- making processes.
Indicator 2.4 – Existence of environmental
education programmes: this indicator measures both
the formal and informal environmental education
programmes in place to address global environmental
issues.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
Rating
Score
1
2
3
0
1
1
2
3
0
0
1
2
3
0
0
1
2
3
116
Capacity Result/Indicator
Indicator range
Indicator 2.5 – Extent of the linkage between
environmental research/science and policy
development: this indicator measures the linkage
between environmental policy and research;
including the identification of research needs and
research strategies and programmes; and the
relevance of the research available to policy
development.
No linkage exist between environmental
policy development and science/research
strategies and programmes
Research needs for environmental policy
development are identified but are not
translated into relevant research
strategies and programmes
Relevant research strategies and
programmes for environmental policy
development exist but the research
information is not responding fully to
the policy research needs
Relevant research results are available
for environmental policy development
Rating
Score
0
0
1
2
3
Capacity Result 3: Capacities for strategy, policy
[Total possible Score = 9]
2
and legislation development
Individuals and organizations have the ability to plan and develop effective environmental policy and legislation,
related strategies and plans – based on informed decision-making processes for global mainstreaming biodiversity.
The biodiversity planning and strategy
development process is not coordinated
0
0
and does not produce adequate
environmental plans and strategies
The biodiversity planning and strategy
development process does produce
Indicator 3.1 – Extent of the biodiversity planning
adequate environmental plans and
1
and strategy development process: this indicator
strategies but there are not implemented
measures the quality of the planning and strategy
/used.
development process; if the planning and strategy
Adequate biodiversity plans and
development process produces adequate plans and
strategies are produced but there are
strategies related to mainstreaming biodiversity; and
only partially implemented because of
2
if the resources and coordination mechanisms are in
funding constraints and/or other
place for the implementation of these plans,
problems.
programmes and projects.
The biodiversity planning and strategy
development process is well coordinated
by the lead environmental organizations
3
and produces the required environmental
plans and strategies; which are being
implemented.
The environmental policy and regulatory
frameworks are insufficient; they do not
0
provide an enabling environment.
Some relevant environmental policies
Indicator 3.2 – Existence of adequate
and laws exist but few are implemented
1
environmental policy and regulatory frameworks
and enforced.
for mainstreaming biodiversity. this indicator
Adequate environmental policy and
measures the completeness of the policy and
legislation frameworks exist but there
regulatory frameworks, the existence and the
2
2
are problems in implementing and
adoption of relevant policies and laws and if the
enforcing them.
mechanisms for enacting, complying and enforcing
Adequate policy and legislation
these policies and laws are established.
frameworks are implemented and
provide an adequate enabling
3
environment; a compliance and
enforcement mechanism is established
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
117
Capacity Result/Indicator
Indicator range
Rating
Score
and functions.
Indicator 3.3 – Adequacy of the environmental
information available for decision-making: this
indicator measures the adequacy of the information
available for decision-making; if the information is
made available to decision-makers and if this
information is updated and used by decision-makers.
The availability of environmental
information for decision-making is
lacking.
Some environmental information exists
but it is not sufficient to support
environmental decision-making
processes.
Relevant environmental information is
made available to environmental
decision-makers but the process to
update this information is not
functioning properly.
Political and administrative decisionmakers obtain and use updated
environmental information to make
environmental decisions.
0
0
1
2
3
Capacity Result 4: Capacities for management
[Total possible Score = 6]
0
and implementation
Individuals and organizations have the plan-do-check-act skills and knowledge to enact environmental policies
and/or regulation decisions, and to plan and execute relevant sustainable global mainstreaming biodiversity
actions/solutions.
The organizations or departments within
organizations focussed on environmental
issues don’t have adequate resources for
0
their programmes and projects and the
requirements have not been assessed.
Indicator 4.1 – Existence and mobilization of
The resource requirements are known
resources by the relevant organizations: this
1
but are not being addressed.
indicator measures the availability of resources
within the relevant organizations, if the potential
The funding sources for these resource
sources for resource funding are identified and if
requirements are partially identified and
2
adequate resources are mobilized.
the resource requirements are partially
addressed.
Adequate resources are mobilized and
available for the functioning of the lead
3
environmental organizations.
The necessary required skills and
technology are not available and the
0
needs are not identified.
The required skills and technologies
Indicator 4.2 – Availability of required technical
needs are identified as well as their
1
skills and technology transfer: this indicator
sources.
measures the availability of skills and knowledge, if
The required skills and technologies are
the technical needs and sources are identified and
obtained but their access depend on
2
accessed by the programme or project and if there is
foreign sources.
a basis for an ongoing national-based upgrading of
The required skills and technologies are
the skills and knowledge.
available and there is a national-based
mechanism for updating the required
3
skills and for upgrading the
technologies.
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
118
0
0
Capacity Result/Indicator
Indicator range
Rating
Score
Capacity Result 5: Capacities to monitor and
[Total possible Score = 6]
0
evaluate
Individuals and organizations have the capacity to effectively monitor and evaluate project and/or programme
achievements against expected results and to provide feedback for learning, adaptive management and suggesting
adjustments to the course of action if necessary to conserve and preserve the global environment.
Irregular project monitoring is being
done without an adequate monitoring
framework detailing what and how to
0
monitor the particular project or
programme.
An adequate resourced monitoring
Indicator 5.1 – Adequacy of the programme
framework is in place but project
1
1
monitoring process: this indicator measures the
monitoring is irregularly conducted.
existence of a monitoring framework, if the
Regular participative monitoring of
monitoring involves stakeholders and if the
results is being conducted but this
monitoring results inform the implementation
information is only partially used by the
2
process.
project/programme implementation
team.
Monitoring information is produced
timely and accurately and is used by the
3
implementation team to learn and
possibly to change the course of action.
None or ineffective evaluations are
being conducted without an adequate
0
0
evaluation plan; including the necessary
resources.
An adequate evaluation plan is in place
but evaluation activities are irregularly
1
Indicator 5.2 – Adequacy of the programme
conducted.
evaluation process: this indicator measures the
Evaluations conducted per an adequate
existence of an evaluation framework for key
evaluation plan but results only partially
environmental guidelines and assessment tools. Do
used by the O&G HSE team and/or EIA
2
they exist? Are adequate resources available to
officers and other staff designing the
enable it and access to information is available and if
next generation of projects.
the evaluation results inform the planning process.
Effective evaluations are conducted in a
timely and accurate manner and are used
by the O&G HSE team and/or EIA
3
officers to correct the course of action if
needed and to learn lessons for further
project planning activities.
Total Score
5
Total possible score
45
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
119
Annex 2. Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust – Platform for Partnerships
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
120
Annex 3. Maps
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
121
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
122
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
123
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
124
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
125
PRODOC
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
126
Annex 4. Industry Assessment and Initial Engagement Plan
Box 5: Summary TOR for the PPG Report ‘Industry Assessment and Initial Industry
Engagement Plan’
PPG Activity 2 (preparation of an ‘Industry Assessment and Initial Industry Engagement Plan’ included the
following elements:
The development of partnerships with oil and gas (O&G) sector government organizations and private
companies is critical to the success of the project. Understanding the views and stakes of the O&G industry,
either operating or prospecting in the Niger Delta, is essential for negotiating effectively with industry players
on issues pertaining to the project outcomes. Within this framework, a study will be carried out by a
competent consultant (either through a consultancy firm or institutional contract) and will contain the
following elements:
- Identify and map the O&G industry players in the Niger Delta, including their concessions, explorations,
operations, as well as their level of investments (current and prospective);
- Assess whether these companies have (or plan to have) corporate environmental plans or policies (including
environmental safety measures) as well as oil spill contingency plans, and more specifically, assess the
company’s positions on biodiversity conservation, particularly Delta and marine biodiversity (for companies
operating and prospecting off-shore). Analyze these plans and their adequacy with respect to the
mainstreaming of biodiversity into off-shore O&G operations in the Niger Delta (criteria to be developed by
consultant);
- Through analysis of corporate plans and policies, as well as contact with corporate representatives, assess the
willingness of companies to join together in a compact to contribute to a Biodiversity Trust Fund, and
(eventually) to a biodiversity offsetting mechanism, as well as their willingness to negotiate siting agreements
with government and other partners, where biodiversity is a consideration at stake.
- Identify potential incentive mechanisms for engaging the industry in the project (e.g. reputational risk,
compliance with standards or official company policies, or key individuals’ moral convictions with respect to
the environment, among others), including industry partners’ willingness to provide co-financing to the
project.
- Outline a capitalization plan for the Trust Fund proposed under the project’s component 3, based on
payments from the industry.
- Propose a plan with clear recommendations for the engagement of the O&G industry in the project and in its
objectives (Initial Industry Engagement Plan).
127
1. INDUSTRY OVERVIEW
Product: Identify and map the O&G industry players in the Niger Delta
1.1 A brief history of the O&G sector in the Niger Delta
Exploration in the region for O&G (oil and gas) was started by a German company in 1908, but was
halted with the start of the 1st World War.48 In 1936, Shell (then known as Shell D'Arcy) secured
exclusive rights to O&G exploration for all of Nigeria and began prospecting until operations were
stopped by the 2nd World War. Immediately after the war, in 1947, Shell, now in partnership with BP,
renewed its prospecting. This lead to a discovery of oil in 1956 in the Niger Delta and production at
Oloibiri began in 1958.
After independence in 1960, Shell’s exclusive rights were curtailed and other companies were invited
to prospect for oil. Soon thereafter, forerunners of Agip/Eni, Chevron/Texaco, ExxonMobil, Total and
others were active in search for oil both onshore and offshore. In 1971, after the independence
struggle in the eastern part of the country, which had declared itself the Republic of Biafra, was
contained, the government established a national oil company that in 1977 became the Nigerian
National Petroleum Corp (NNPC).
1.2 The O&G sector today
Today, the basic model for O&G operations in the Niger Delta is a Joint Operating Agreement (JOA)
between NNPC and operating companies.49 The six major JOAs with foreign companies are:
 Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria Limited (SPDC)
o Largest producer: 40% of the Nigeria’s oil production with more than 80 oil fields, mostly
onshore, on dry lands or mangroves
o Ownership: NNPC 55%, Shell 30%, Elf 10%, Agif 5%
 Chevron Nigeria Limited (CNL)
o Operates in Warri region and offshore in shallow water
o Ownership: NNPC 60%, Chevron 40%
 Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited (MPNU)
o Operates offshore in shallow water in Akwa Ibom and plans to operate in deep water; may
take over Shell as the largest producer in the country
o Ownership: NNPC 60%, Mobil 40%
 Nigerian Agip Oil Company Limited (NAOC)
o Operates small onshore fields
o Ownership: NNPC 60%, Agip 20%, Phillips Petroleum 20%
 Elf Petroleum Nigeria Limited (EPNL)
o Operates on and offshore
48
49
See: http://www.allbusiness.com/mining/oil-gas-extraction-crude-petroleum-natural/288169-1.html.
See: http://www.nnpcgroup.com/NNPCBusiness/UpstreamVentures.aspx.
128
o Ownership: NNPC 60%, Elf 40%
 Texaco Overseas Petroleum Company of Nigeria Unlimited (TOPCON)
o Operates five offshore fields
o Ownership: NNPC 60%, Texaco 20%, Chevron 20%
1.3 Recent O&G production statistics
The latest statistics for the O&G sector provided by NNPC are from 2008.50 They include the
following details:
 Crude O&G production
o “Total crude oil and condensate production for the year was 768,745,932 barrels… with a
daily average of 2.10 mmb/pd. This is lower than that of 2007 by 4.27%.”
o “In the gas sector, a total of 2,282.44 Billion Standard Cubic Feet (BSCF) of Natural Gas
was produced by eleven (11) Oil Producing Companies. This shows a decrease of 5.51%
when compared with 2007 production. And of the quantity produced, 1,664.97 BSCF was
utilized, while 617.62 BSCF (27.06%) was flared.”
 Crude oil and condensate production
o “Production by various companies shows that, Mobil had the highest production figure of
167,190,786 barrels with an average of 456,805.43 barrels per day. This accounts for
21.75% of the total production. Shell Petroleum Development Company (SPDC) came
second with a production figure of 129,328,995 barrels or 353,357.91 barrels per day, which
is 16.82% of the total production. Chevron came third with a production figure of
118,201,198 barrels, averaging 322,954.09 barrels per day or 15.38% of the total
production.”
o “NPDC which is NNPC’s upstream subsidiary engaged in Oil and Gas exploration and
production activities produced 12,366,780 barrels. The following Table I shows total
production figures by company, average daily production and percentage contribution…”
Table I) Crude Oil Production by Company
Crude Oil Production
Company
bbls
m3
Daily Average
(Barrel)
% of Total
Production
Joint Venture Companies
SPDC
129,328,995.00
20,561,628.93
358,357.91
16.82
Mobil
167,190,786.00
26,581,161.49
456,805.43
21.75
Chevron
118,201,198.00
18,792,453.87
322,054.09
15.38
Total E&P
70,846,832.00
11,263,725.28
193,570.58
9.22
NAOC/Phillips
42,552,843.00
6,765,348.85
116,264.60
5.54
Chevron Texaco
4,250,709.00
675,807.47
11,613.96
0.55
Pan-Ocean
9,764,634.00
1,552,449.87
26,679.33
1.27
50
See: http://www.nnpcgroup.com/Portals/0/Monthly%20Performance/
2008%20ASB%201st%20Edition%20Web.pdf.
129
542,135,997.00
86,192,575.76
Daily Average
(Barrel)
1,481,245.89
Star Deep
14,966,049.00
2,379,407.23
40,890.84
1.95
Addax
39,591,166.00
6,294,480.71
108,172.58
5.15
Esso Exp. & Pro Nig LTD
71,942,086.00
11,437,856.43
196,563.08
9.36
6,606,494.00
1,050,346.66
18,050.53
0.86
62,021,898.00
9,860,675.50
169,458.74
8.07
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
195,127,693.00
31,022,766.53
533,135.77
25.39
AENR
3,361,078.00
534,367.71
9,183.27
0.44
Sub total
3,361,078.00
534,367.71
9,183.27
0.44
10,872,342.00
1,728,561.04
29,795.85
1.41
1,494,438.00
237,596.21
4,083.16
0.19
22,403.00
3,561.79
61.21
0.00
Express Petroleum
491,615.00
78,160.39
1,343.21
0.06
AMNI
298,932.00
47,526.30
816.75
0.04
1,596,587.00
253,836.58
4,362.26
0.21
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
388,117.00
61,705.56
1,060.43
0.05
Moni Pulo
5,980,100.00
950,758.16
16,339.07
0.78
Dubri
5,128,636.00
656,339.45
11,280.43
0.54
26,273,170.00
4,018,045.48
69,142.37
3.28
Niger Dlta Pet. Res.
1,346,666.00
214,102.39
3,679.42
0.18
Platform Petroleum
898,575.00
142,861.74
2,455.12
0.12
Midwestern Oil
467,811.00
74,375.87
1,278.17
0.06
Walter Smith
134,942.00
21,454.02
368.69
0.02
2,847,994.00
452,794.02
7,781.40
0.38
768,745,932.00
122,220,609.49
2,100,398.72
100.00
Company
Sub Total
Crude Oil Production
% of Total
Production
70.52
Prod. Sharing Companies
NAE
SNEPCO
SA Pet/ Tal Upstream NIG.
Sub Total
Service Contract
Independents/Sole Risk
NPDC/AENR
NPDC
Consolidated
Cavendish Petroleum
Atlas
Continental Oil
Sub Total
Marginal Fields
Sub Total
Grand Total
 Natural gas production and utilization
o “A total of 631.19 BSCF (27.65%) of the natural gas produced was flared, while 1,651.25
BSCF (72.35%) was utilized as follows; 758.78 BSCF was sold to third parties, 391.08
BSCF was re-injected and 331.57 BSCF was for NLNG as LNG feedstock. Other utilisation
include 80.40 BSCF and 58.56 BSCF used internally as fuel gas and gas lift to enhance
condensate production respectively. EPCL took 7.64 BSCF as fuel gas for their plants and
23.58 BSCF as feedstock for LPG/NGL.”
130
o “The total Natural Gas Liquid
(NGL) produced in 2008 was 1.16
Million Metric Tons, out of which
Mobil had about 51% (0.59
Million MT) and NNPC 49%
(0.57Million MT). A total of 1.14
Million Metric Tons was lifted.
The Liquefied Petroleum Gas
(LPG) production amounted to
about 0.19 Million Metric Tons
while lifting was slightly above
0.20 Million Metric Tons.”
1.4 Recent O&G economic statistics
According to the US Energy Information
Administration, “the Nigerian economy is
heavily dependent on the oil sector, which,
according to the International Monetary
Fund (IMF), accounts for over 95 percent of
export earnings and about 65 percent of
government revenues.”51
Regarding exports of oil:
“In 2009, Nigeria exported most of its 2.2 million bbl/d of total oil production (approximately
1.9 million bbl/d were exported). Of this, close to 800,000 bbl/d (40 percent) was exported to
the United States, making Nigeria the 5th largest foreign oil supplier to the United States for
the year… Additional importers of Nigerian crude oil include Europe (24 percent), Asia (20
percent), Brazil (10 percent), and South Africa (4 percent).”
Regarding the export of natural gas:
“In 2008, Nigeria consumed around 430 Bcf, mostly for electricity generation where, according
to the International Energy Agency (IEA) natural gas accounts for slightly over 65 percent of
generated electricity… Most of Nigeria’s marketed natural gas production is exported as
liquefied natural gas (LNG)… In 2009, Nigeria exported close to 500 Bcf of LNG. Of this,
13.3 Bcf went to the United States, providing 3 percent of total U.S. LNG imports (2 percent of
Nigerian exports). Most of Nigeria’s LNG was exported to Europe (66 percent), mainly Spain
(31 percent), France (15 percent) and Portugal (13 percent). Other export destinations include
Asia (15 percent) and Mexico (16 percent).”
According the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), on the other hand, the O&G sector “provides
95% of foreign exchange earnings and about 80% of budgetary revenues.”52 The CIA also provides
data on export earnings and the national budget, which in turn indicate the level of revenues generated
by the O&G sector.
51
52
See: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/Nigeria/pdf.pdf.
See: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ni.html.
131
O&G Sector
2009 est US$ billions Share US$ billions
Exports
47.75
95%
45.36
Gov Budget
13.61
80%
10.89
The use of these earnings by the Government of Nigeria remains controversial. For example, a 2008
country profile from the US Library of Congress53 reports as follows:
“Nigeria’s economy is struggling to leverage the country’s vast wealth in fossil fuels in order to
displace the crushing poverty that affects about 57 percent of its population. Economists refer
to the coexistence of vast natural resources wealth and extreme personal poverty in developing
countries like Nigeria as the ‘paradox of plenty’ or the ‘curse of oil.’ Nigeria’s exports of oil
and natural gas—at a time of peak prices—have enabled the country to post merchandise trade
and current account surpluses in recent years. Reportedly, 80 percent of Nigeria’s energy
revenues flow to the government, 16 percent cover operational costs, and the remaining 4
percent go to investors. However, the World Bank has estimated that, as a result of corruption,
80 percent of energy revenues benefit only 1 percent of the population.”
2. PROFILE OF KEY INDUSTRY PLAYERS
Product: Assess whether these companies have (or plan to have) CSR plans or policies,
oil spill contingency plans, and their positions on biodiversity conservation; assess the
adequacy of these.
2.1 Overview
All companies in the O&G sector today have policies and plans with respect to managing the
environmental and social impacts of their operations. These policies and plans are in response to a
number of drivers including national regulations, requirements of investors, and management
commitments to corporate social responsibility (CSR). More challenging, however, is to ascertain a
company’s policies and plans with respect to biodiversity. This challenge is in part due to the
complexity of the concept of biodiversity as well as to the complexity of the response to biodiversity
expected by the international community, as reflected in the objectives and priorities of the
Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).54
As indicated in the following company profiles, the general state of play in the O&G sector with
respect to biodiversity in the Niger Delta is not terribly well developed. Through most multinational
oil companies have stated international commitments to biodiversity and some of the them have
implemented some biodiversity actions at specific locations, there remains a real opportunity to
develop a more strategic and coherent approach to biodiversity for the O&G operations of the Niger
Delta.
53
See: http://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/profiles/Nigeria.pdf.
See: http://cbd.int. Note: Further discussion of what is biodiversity and what we are supposed to do about it is covered
later in this report.
54
132
In this section, a selection of key international company profiles is followed by a profile of the
Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation – the majority shareholder in all the O&G projects in the
Niger Delta. The section is concluded by an assessment of the challenges and opportunities for
mainstreaming biodiversity into the O&G sector in the Niger Delta.
2.2 Addax
Corporate level
The company’s London Stock Exchange filing prospectus55 includes the following statement which
mentions its biodiversity commitment and some initiatives in the Niger Delta:
Environmental Policies and Programmes
The Corporation is continuing both on its own and in partnership with non-governmental
organisations to work to reduce the environmental footprint of its operations, to promote
sustainable development and to protect and improve the ecology and biodiversity of the
countries in which it does business. The Corporation is also continuing to work to ensure that it
would be able to comply with the Government of Nigeria’s “flares down” policy, which will
likely require oil companies to end the practice of gas flaring in 2008.
As part of its support for sustainable economic development in Nigeria, The Corporation is
working with Pro-Natura International (Nigeria), a non-governmental organisation that
advocates the use of participatory processes as the most viable vehicle for sustainable
development, conflict resolution and economic growth for marginalised communities in the
Niger Delta.
The Corporation is also supporting two major conservation initiatives:
 An international research and education centre for the study of primates, biodiversity
research and forest management in the tropical rainforest of Cross River State, Nigeria. The
research centre is run by CERCOPAN, a Nigerian environmental non-governmental
organisation; and
 Two programmes administered by the Sahara Conservation Fund – one in Chad and one in
Niger – to protect and preserve the addax antelope from which the Corporation takes its
name.
The Corporation continues to re refine its environmental policies and programmes and
regularly consults with local stakeholders and non-governmental organisations to align its
programmes with local priorities.
Local level
The Addax Petroleum Foundation56 reports on the following project in Western Africa:
55
See: http://www.addaxpetroleum.com/_media/LSE_Filing_Prospectus.pdf.
56
See: http://www.addaxpetroleumfoundation.org/en/page.php?pageid=57&project=3.
133
Conserve endangered Addax in the Tin Toumma region of Niger by supporting the Sahara
Conservation Fund (SCF)
Through its support to the SCF (Sahara Conservation Fund), Addax Petroleum Foundation
commits specifically to the conservation of the addax antelope and more generally to the
conservation of deserts and their natural and cultural heritage. The addax conservation project
in the Termit/Tin Toumma region of the Niger basin is directly related to finding a balance
between social development and preservation of wildlife. The local pastoral population should
directly benefit from the preservation of the natural heritage in which it lives. This link is key
to the beneficial impact of this project in the long run.
The Termit/Tin Toumma region of Niger harbours the last remaining viable population of
addax in the world. Field work carried out by the SCF since 2002 has indicated a population of
about 200 animals. Apart from the Niger population there have been only sporadic reports of
small numbers of addax in Chad and Mauritania. Outside the Sahara, the addax species is
extinct. Its successful preservation would benefit a whole range of desert habitats and species
as well as the Bedouin people of the region. The three-year programme, initiated by Addax
Petroleum in 2005, includes:
 Improving biodiversity conservation with special reference to the addax and other
endangered species and their critical trans-boundary habitats;
 Enhancing cooperation and implication of the local population and other partners in the
protection and conservation of the region’s biodiversity;
 Increasing knowledge and understanding of the area’s ecology and biodiversity, and
establishing systems for long-term monitoring, research and management;
 Increasing awareness at national and international levels of the value and importance
(ecological, social, cultural, educational, etc.) of the region’s wildlife and natural resources.
According to the Corporate Citizenship page of its website,57 Addax Petroleum also continues to
support other conservation initiatives in the region, including:
Two programs with the United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR), consisting of
improving fluvial transportation around the Ogooué and Fernan-Vaz Rivers in Gabon and in
facilitating a peaceful transfer of authority on the Bakassi peninsula from Nigeria to Cameroon.
2.3 Chevron
Corporate level
Biodiversity features on Chevron’s corporate website58 which includes the following Biodiversity
Statement: 59
Chevron adopted a Biodiversity Statement in 2007 and requires a biodiversity assessment as
part of its ESHIA process for major capital projects. Our Health, Environment and Safety staff
work to protect habitats near our operations and share their best practices through the Chevron
Biodiversity Network…
57
See: http://www.addaxpetroleum.com/corporate_citizenship/community_relations
See: http://www.chevron.com/globalissues/environment/biodiversity/.
59 See: http://www.chevron.com/globalissues/environment/biodiversity/.
58
134
Chevron's Approach to Biodiversity Conservation
We recognize the importance of biodiversity conservation and support it through our values,
performance, and communication and engagement.
Values: Protecting the safety and health of people and the environment is a Chevron core value.
Therefore, we:
 Strive to design our facilities and conduct our operations to avoid adverse impacts to human
health and to operate in an environmentally sound, reliable and efficient manner.
 Conduct our operations responsibly in all areas, including environments with sensitive
biological characteristics.
Performance: We strive to avoid or minimize significant risks and impacts our projects and
operations may pose to sensitive species, habitats and ecosystems. This means that we:
 Integrate biodiversity into our business decision-making and management through our
Operational Excellence (OE) management system.
 Drive and assess our performance relating to biodiversity through key OE expectations,
such as Environmental Stewardship, and processes, including HES Due Diligence for
Property Transfers; Environmental, Social and Health Impact Assessment; and Risk
Management.
 Understand that humans and the natural environment are interdependent and interact with
each other in various ways. In managing our impacts we consider those interrelationships
and the functions ecosystems perform in supporting sustainable economic development.
 Recognize that our activities could affect particularly sensitive or valuable biodiversity
inside or outside of legally-designated protected areas. Therefore we:
o Decide whether and how to operate in a protected or sensitive area, based on
consideration of the specific circumstances of the area and operation involved.
o Operate in such areas only with government legal authorization, and where we are
confident we can comply with all regulatory requirements and use operating practices
appropriately protective of the area.
o Use our OE processes to avoid or minimize potential risks of our operations to sensitive
biological resources and seek ways to make positive contributions to biodiversity
conservation in the area.
Communication and Engagement: We undertake activities to raise internal and external
awareness of the importance of conserving biodiversity and how the company is addressing it.
This includes:
 Communicating about our biodiversity-related activities to employees and outside
audiences, such as through our Corporate Responsibility report.
 Engaging with government, local communities and others to understand and work to
address significant biodiversity issues in areas where we operate.
 Participating in industry associations and other forums to share and promote best practices
for biodiversity conservation.
 Seeking to understand and, where appropriate, participating in development of external
policy-making activities that affect our operations, such as those adopted under the UN
Convention on Biological Diversity and national, regional and local biodiversity policies
and plans.
 Working with a variety of external organizations to make positive contributions to
135
biodiversity conservation in areas where we operate and globally.
Chevron also maintains an Operational Excellence Management System (OEMS)60 which is relevant
to biodiversity. It has 13 elements as follows with the relevant parts for biodiversity highlighted in
bold/italics:
1. Security of Personnel and Assets - Providing a secure environment in which business
operations may be conducted successfully.
2. Facilities Design and Construction - Designing and constructing facilities to prevent injury,
illness and incidents and to operate reliably, efficiently and in an environmentally sound
manner.
3. Safe Operations - Operating and maintaining facilities in a manner that does not cause injuries,
illnesses or incidents.
4. Management of Change - Managing both permanent and temporary changes to prevent
incidents.
5. Reliability and Efficiency:
- Reliability - Operating and maintaining facilities to sustain mechanical integrity and
prevent incidents.
- Efficiency - Maximizing efficiency of operations and conserving natural resources.
6. Third-Party Services - Systematically addressing and managing contractor conformance to OE
through contractual agreements.
7. Environmental Stewardship - Working to prevent pollution and waste; striving to continually
improve environmental performance and limiting impacts from our operations.
8. Product Stewardship - Managing potential risks of our products throughout the products' lifecycles.
9. Incident Investigation - Investigating incidents to identify, broadly communicate and correct
root causes of incidents to reduce the likelihood of recurrence.
10. Community Awareness and Outreach - Reaching out to the community and engaging in open
dialogue to build trust.
11. Emergency Management - Having preparedness plans in place to quickly and effectively
respond to and recover from any emergency.
12. Compliance Assurance - Complying and verifying conformance with company policy and all
applicable laws and regulations; applying responsible standards where laws and regulations do
not exist; enabling employees and contractors to understand their safety, health and
environmental responsibilities.
13. Legislative and Regulatory Advocacy - Working ethically and constructively to influence
proposed laws and regulations, and debate on emerging issues.
Local level
In Nigeria, Chevron’s joint venture concession with NNPC is approximately 2.2 million acres (8,900
sq km).61 Its fact sheet62 on Nigeria notes the following:
Chevron has restored 15 abandoned land drill sites and 35 burrow pits and has decommissioned
nine abandoned land wells, with work continuing on other sites. Community and indigenous
contractors are engaged for the restoration work, reflecting CNL's ongoing commitment to
using local resources and encouraging others to do the same.
60
See: http://www.chevron.com/about/operationalexcellence/managementsystem/.
See: http://www.chevron.com/documents/pdf/nigeriafactsheet.pdf.
62 See: http://www.chevron.com/documents/pdf/nigeriafactsheet.pdf.
61
136
2.4 ConocoPhillips
Corporate level
On the Biodiversity section of their corporate website,63 ConocoPhillips explains its overall
commitment to biodiversity conservation:
We recognize the importance of protecting and promoting biodiversity, particularly in sensitive
areas. In 2008, the company issued a biodiversity position in which we made a number of
specific commitments designed to conserve biodiversity as part of our commitment to
systematically reduce the effects of our activities on the environment.
We are continuously building our knowledge about the ecosystems in which we work and
recently completed an internal study to benchmark our performance compared to other
extractive-industry companies. To increase internal awareness about biodiversity, a knowledgesharing intranet site has been launched to foster employee collaboration within ConocoPhillips
in the areas of biodiversity and ecosystems. In 2008, we conducted industry benchmarking to
explore better ways to collect and manage our biodiversity data…
We follow widely accepted guidelines from the International Petroleum Industry
Environmental Conservation Association (IPIECA) and the International Association of Oil
and Gas Producers (OGP) in our approach to biodiversity conservation…
The company’s Biodiversity Position64 includes the following statements:
ConocoPhillips recognizes the importance of biodiversity in maintaining ecosystems’ health
and as a vital factor in human well-being. Protecting plant and animal species and ecosystems,
also known as “biological diversity”, or “biodiversity”, is an essential component of our health,
safety, and environmental commitment wherever we operate.
Biodiversity is a term used to capture the concept of the world’s biological richness and
variability. Biodiversity includes all populations and species of plants, animals, and microbes
that occur in nature and the interactions within and between these populations that contribute to
ecosystem function. Ecosystem functions provide essential services that support human needs
such as food, shelter, clothing, medicines, and fuel. Biodiversity can also have recreational,
cultural, spiritual and aesthetic values.
ConocoPhillips will implement mitigation planning processes aimed at reducing the effects of
our activities on the environment and conserve biodiversity. We will address biodiversity
conservation as part of investment appraisal, and during the planning and development of
major capital projects by conducting environmental impact analyses, collecting key
environmental data and implementing mitigation and monitoring programs to reduce impacts
and assure results.
Our Approach...
63
64
See: http://www.conocophillips.com/EN/susdev/environment/biodiversity/Pages/index.aspx.
See: http://www.conocophillips.com/EN/susdev/policies/biodiversity_position/Pages/index.aspx.
137
 Integration of biodiversity conservation principles in our business management systems,
considering all stages of the asset life cycle
 Development of Biodiversity Action Plans for projects located in areas of high conservation
value
 Use of widely available and effective planning tools such as those developed by IPIECA,
Energy and Biodiversity Initiative, and the International Association of Oil and Gas
Producers to facilitate biodiversity conservation
 Adoption of a landscape-scale perspective which promotes habitat integrity and
connectivity over a broader area than just our Trust sites as important issues in land use
decision making
 Consideration of targeted opportunities for habitat improvement, including projects for
rehabilitation. The use of biodiversity offsets will be considered when appropriate.
 Collaboration with key stakeholders to increase capacity for biodiversity protection,
internally and in related institutions and communities
 Linkage of biodiversity protection with GHG emissions reductions, where both goals can be
met through integrated planning and action
Local level
In Nigeria, the company “has an interest in four onshore oil mining leases (OMLs) and exploration
rights in one Nigerian deepwater oil prospecting lease (OPL) and one deepwater OML.”65 This
includes a 17% interest in Brass LNG, a new facility in the central Niger Delta.
Though the company has supported social development projects in the region, to date it has not
profiled support for biodiversity. Nevertheless, it is clear from the company’s corporate commitment
to biodiversity that it would most likely support biodiversity projects in the Niger Delta.
2.5 Eni-Agip
Corporate level
On its corporate website, ENI reports the following:66
Eni has been very active in biodiversity and ecosystem services areas, so far as to earn, for
2010, the position of chair of the IPIECA’s Biodiversity Working Group. Furthermore, the
projects regarding the study, monitoring and mitigation of the impact on biodiversity from
operational activities continued in 2009, also in order to prearrange specific tools and programs
applied to all Company activities, following EBI’s guidelines (Energy and Biodiversity
Initiative).
Since 2008 Eni has joined Proteus 2012, an initiative promoted by UNEP-WCMC that aims at
developing a comprehensive database of information on protected areas with rich biodiversity,
by using the different datasets and the available information.
In 2009, the information provided by the World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA) was
significantly improved, and the Marine WDPA platform was launched, which groups the
marine protected areas with dedicated details and attributes.
65
66
See: http://www.conocophillips.com/EN/about/worldwide_ops/country/africa/pages/nigeria.aspx.
See: http://www.eni.com/en_IT/sustainability/communities/biodiversity/biodiversity.shtml.
138
At the same time of its commitment for the preservation of biodiversity and the evaluation of
the interaction between the operations and the biodiversity rich areas, Eni started analyzing
how it could assess and protect the most complex ecosystemic functions and define their
relation with the activities of the energy sector. Within this ambit, since 2009 Eni has been part
of the Environmental Services, Tools & Markets Working Group promoted by Business for
Social Responsibility (BSR) which is, to this date, the foremost initiative for enterprises for a
comparison and assessment of the most advanced tools and methods for the assessment of
ecosystemic services during the entire lifespan of the plants.
Furthermore, Eni joined the EVI road tester project supported by the World Business Council
for Sustainable Development, to carry out a test for a preliminary assessment of the
ecosystemic services; the test will be carried out with the advice of IUCN, the world
organization for conservation of biodiversity, with which Eni has been collaborating since
2008.
All these initiatives are coordinated by a working group that includes Eni and the Eni Enrico
Mattei Foundation.
Local level
Regarding the company’s operations in the Niger Delta, the following biodiversity-relevant
information is available:67
Green River Project - The Green River Project is a project started by Eni in 1987 through the
subsidiary NAOC (Nigerian Agip Oil Company), together with its partners Phillips Petroleum
and Nigerian National Petroleum Company (NNPC). This community development project is
the most important one carried out in the Niger Delta by NAOC. It consists in a rural
development program, which is modular and integrated, and has the purpose of creating a
system of agricultural production and sustainable food in order to promote socio-economic
welfare of rural populations living in the Niger Delta. The project includes: production and
distribution of seeds resistant to diseases and environmental stresses and analysis of land for
soil conservation; fishing and transferring the appropriate production methods to the rural
communities, the establishment of cooperatives and associations to ensure that technical
innovations are best implemented, applied, managed and further disseminated by the recipients,
the introduction of equipment for the processing of rural products, and the use of small
machinery for tillage and transport of goods. The project includes the rural districts of the oil
sites in Rivers, Bayelsa, Delta and Imo, where a total of 400.000 people live, and it has
contributed to doubling the harvests compared to traditional agriculture and consequently the
families' profits.
Agro-processing activities - A very important part of the Green River Project focused on local
agriculture strengthening through the improvement of agro-processing capabilities. In this
sense the provision of machineries for the treatment of agricultural products played a crucial
role in the development of local economies. The Cottage Industry initiative set as objective the
improvement of bread production in the Mgbede area, in cooperation with the Mgbede Farmers
Cooperative Society, the Mgbede Community and D-Emmason Engineering Ltd. The project,
now completed, employs six people and has shown a 300% revenue increase. Through the
Cassava Processing Mill project, implemented in cooperation with the Cooperative Society
Omuko and Integrated Systems Ltd, significant progress was made in the milling of flour in
67
See: http://www.eni.com/en_IT/eni-world/nigeria/local-development/local-development.shtml.
139
order to obtain "garri", a basic local food. The project was completed with the hiring of four
women, whose income increased by 125%. Finally, the Plantain Flour House Project
implemented in cooperation with the Mgbede Young Farmers Cooperative Society and
Demmason Engineering Ltd, has improved the business of a coop producing and selling
plantain flour and palm oil. The coop has expanded its business reaching other regions of
south-east Nigeria and has hired 10 people from the local community, whose income increased
by 300%. The coop was awarded the "Farmer of the Year Award" from the Central Bank of
Nigeria. Palm oil business has also improved resulting in the hiring of four local people whose
income has increased by 200%. Professional training activities enabled over 400 young people
to enter a variety of professions (carpenter, hair stylist, bricklayer, information technology
expert)…
Eni's overall commitment to the promotion of the socio-economic development of communities
situated in the Niger Delta is demonstrated also by the deployment, according to authorities and
other local stakeholders, of hundreds of infrastructural projects: construction of public
buildings, roads, bridges, piers, creation of a river transport service, electrification of villages
and construction of sewerage systems and water purification.
In 2009, eni completed the implementation of 44 infrastructure projects valued at over six
million Dollars in 29 communities as part of MOU commitments. Over 300 other projects are
at various stages of implementation.
2.6 ExxonMobil
Corporate level
ExxonMobil has a section of its corporate website on ‘Protecting biodiversity’68 which includes the
following:
Our sites incorporate biodiversity protection in their efforts to limit impacts in sensitive areas.
We identify biodiversity protection objectives and actions for each location through our
Environmental Business Planning efforts. Our mitigation actions include participating in
initiatives to enhance the wildlife and habitat attributes of our properties as well as modifying
engineering design, construction, and operating practices to protect particular species and
sensitive habitats.
ExxonMobil is actively involved in a worldwide, multiyear industry research effort on the
effects of exploration and production sound on marine life. Launched in 2004, under the
auspices of the International Association of Oil and Gas Producers, the goal of the program is
to enhance scientific knowledge to help assess the potential impacts of sound on marine life,
assist in improving industry risk assessment and mitigation, and improve the scientific
knowledge base used to develop regulations and mitigation strategies. To date, this program
has improved research by characterizing industry sound sources; developing PAMGUARD, a
marine mammal identification software; and improving satellite tags for animal tracking.
Local level
Regarding the company’s operations in Nigeria, they do not state anything specifically with regard to
biodiversity. However, in a report on their operations in Africa,69 ExxonMobil describes some of its
68
See: http://www.exxonmobil.com/Corporate/energy_env_sustain.aspx.
140
biodiversity actions in other African countries. This indicates the potential for similar activities in the
Niger Delta.
2.7 Shell
Corporate level
Over the past decade, Shell has positioned itself as an industry leader with respect to biodiversity
action. On its corporate biodiversity homepage,70 the company states:
Protecting biodiversity is an important factor when we consider any new major project or large
expansion to existing operations. Our approach to biodiversity is an integrated part of the way
we operate. It builds on the industry-first standard we set in 2001 and now incorporate in our
biodiversity manual.
The company has also made public commitments about whether or not to operate in areas of ‘high
biodiversity’:71
We believe some areas are too sensitive to enter. But we also believe that through a transparent
process, partnerships and stringent operating practices it is possible to operate responsibly in
some areas that are under protection or rich in biodiversity. We define areas high in
biodiversity value as:
•
•
•
•
•
areas protected by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (categories I-VI);
wetlands of international importance (according to the Ramsar convention);
Natura 2000 sites (under the European Birds Directive and Habitats Directive);
important bird areas (defined by Birdlife International); and
biosphere reserves (under the UNESCO Man and the Biosphere Programme).
We have developed biodiversity action plans for major operations in areas of high biodiversity
value to help improve the way we operate. Guidance from IPIECA/OGP… forms the basis of
each plan. We had plans in place at nine major operations in areas of high biodiversity value by
the end of 2009, including six in places designated by the IUCN as Category I-IV protected
areas.
In partnership with IUCN, in 2008 Shell also released a major report on ‘Building Biodiversity
Business’72 which explores market-based opportunities for conserving biodiversity and using
biological resources sustainably
Local level
69
See: http://www.exxonmobil.com/Corporate/Files/news_pub_africa.pdf.
See: http://www.shell.com/home/content/environment_society/environment
/biodiversity/shell_biodiversity/.
71 See: http://www.shell.com/home/content/environment_society/environment
/biodiversity/protected_areas/.
70
72
See:http://www-static.shell.com/static/environment_society/downloads/environment
/biodiversity/building_biodiversity_business_2008.pdf?__utma=1.689180529.1285598692.1285598692.1285598692.1&__utmb=1.6.10.12
85598692&__utmc=1&__utmx=&__utmz=1.1285598692.1.1.utmcsr=bing|utmccn=(organic)|utmcmd=organic|utmctr=shell.com%2fbiodiversity&__utmv=&__utmk=63947183.
141
The company is also addressing biodiversity in the Niger Delta as indicated in their biodiversity brief
on their operations in Nigeria.73 This brief includes the following information:
The Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria Limited (SPDC) worked with local
groups, government, forest communities, other energy companies, regulators and non-profit
organisations (NGOs) to develop biodiversity action plans to conserve two forest reserves –
Gele-Gele and Urhonigbe, in Edo State.
The Gele-Gele reserve covers 363 square kilometres with a range of habitats varying from
freshwater swamp forest to tropical rain forest, while the Urhonigbe reserve covers 308 square
kilometres…
In support of the SPDC-proposed biodiversity plan and effort, the Edo State government passed
a biodiversity law in 2007. The law amended the logging concession process and transferred
forest management rights and responsibilities to community based management and grass-root
consultative committees established by the biodiversity action plans. The success of the plans
depends on local communities taking ownership and responsibility for them…
Further work is required to convince members of the respective communities of the importance
of preserving the forests. Enforcement of the biodiversity law is weak – this has negatively
affected progress of the projects. SPDC has had several meetings with government officials,
local communities and the forest management committees to discuss the challenges, identify
and agree on solutions.
One of the solutions identified is to assist stakeholder communities develop livelihoods that
reduce their dependence on the forest. In furtherance of this, SPDC launched a microcredit
programme with funding from its joint venture partners, which has distributed $38,000 (Shell
share $11,400) of revolving loans to 240 people in 10 stakeholder communities between 2008
and 2009…
Despite the challenges, the Gele-Gele and Urhonigbe projects have provided a valuable
experience, which SPDC is now applying in new biodiversity action plans that are being
prepared for the Stubbs Creek Forest Reserve in Akwa Ibom State, Andoni Forest Reserve in
Rivers State and Taylor Creek Forest Reserve in Bayelsa State, all in the central Niger Delta.
2.8 Total
Corporate level
Total has a corporate level website on ‘Protecting Biodiversity’74 which explains that:
We have been working to preserve biodiversity for nearly 30 years. In 1980, we formed the St.
Fergus Dunes Management Committee in Scotland. Following the Rio Earth Summit in 1992,
we established the Total Corporate Foundation for Biodiversity and the Sea, which has
supported more than 200 research projects dedicated to enhancing knowledge to protect species
and ecosystems. In 2005, we issued a formal Biodiversity Policy Statement setting out the
objectives that have guided our action over the years:
73
See: http://www-static.shell.com/static/nga/downloads/pdfs/briefing_notes/biodiversity.pdf.
74
See: http://www.total.com/en/our-challenges/preserving-the-environment/controlling-our-impacts-on-the-localenvironment/protecting-biodiversity-201019.html.
142




minimizing the impact of our activities on biodiversity,
integrating the protection of biodiversity into our Environmental Management System,
paying special attention to regions whose biodiversity is particularly rich or vulnerable,
taking part in scientific research and helping to improve our knowledge of biodiversity.
To ensure that this policy is applied in the field, we have drawn up a Practical Biodiversity
Guide, distributed since 2007.
Minimizing our footprint
Biodiversity is an integral part of the baseline surveys and environmental impact assessment
conducted prior to each project.
Our aim is to gain knowledge and understanding of the ecosystems in the very diverse areas in
which we operate, assess their vulnerability, identify the related environmental and/or social
and economic issues and develop the most appropriate technical approach…
In Yemen, for example, coral reefs were discovered during the environmental baseline survey
prior to the launch of the Yemen LNG project. Project teams reacted by redesigning part of
the plant's infrastructure and modifying plans for shoreline work in the port of Balhaf, to
reduce the impact of construction on ocean currents, and coral and fish communities… Yemen
LNG has also set up a partnership with the International Union for Conservation of Nature
(IUCN) to implement an observatory of marine biodiversity. Moreover, Yemen LNG is
working with the local environmental protection authority to assist in its introduction of a
comprehensive coastal zone management plan.
Broadening our knowledge
We take part in scientific research and the advancement of knowledge through our research
centers, the Total Foundation and the many research programs conducted in partnership with
other bodies, including the French oceanographic research institute Ifremer, the World
Conservation Monitoring Centre and the International Union for Conservation of Nature
(IUCN)…
We are currently drawing up a geographic information system (GIS) to show the locations of
our facilities with respect to the protected areas defined by the IUCN, UNESCO (Man and the
Biosphere program) and the RAMSAR4 convention on wetlands (lagoons, peat bogs, etc.). We
have access to regularly updated data through an agreement signed with the World
Conservation Monitoring Centre. The GIS is set to be finalized at the end of 2010. The data
provided will enable managers to make any necessary changes to biodiversity protection
measures at their sites and to develop biodiversity protection plans tailored to their context in
partnership with local stakeholders.
Local level
With respect to the company’s operations in Nigeria, though there is nothing specific on biodiversity,
there is a clear commitment to sustainable development:75
75
See: http://www.ng.total.com/04_total_nigeria_activities/0408_sustainable_development.htm.
143
In over four decades of working in Nigeria, TOTAL E&P Nigeria Limited (TEPNG) has made
enormous investments in communities through contributions to human development, social
infrastructure such as roads, water, electricity, health, economic empowerment and enterprise identifying the company as a responsive and responsible technical organization with a human
face.
On August I, 2007 a new vision and structure for sustainable development came into effect
with a view to achieving the highest form of sustainability where the communities run majority
of their programmes through institutions and enterprises set up by themselves for themselves
with us as facilitators.
Also, Total has a 15% stake in Nigeria LNG (NLNG) which has taken biodiversity into account in its
EIA76 and its environmental management. NLNG commitments include the following:77
Conservation of the environment: NLNG will support local leaders and competent authorities
to execute their responsibility to control existing off-site, non-project related developments and
control clearance and exploitation of the forest for settlements and agriculture. NLNG will
monitor the level of access and exploitation of the forest areas and assist local authorities with
public enlightenment to conserve forests areas.
2.9 Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation
Corporate level
As noted above, the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) is the majority shareholder in
all of the O&G projects in the Niger Delta. Though the international companies most often have
operating responsibilities, senior management and financial decisions are ultimately determined by
NNPC. Hence, the company’s commitment to a Green Environment78 is a critical factor for
mainstreaming biodiversity into the O&G sector:
NNPC is committed to responsible environmental practices. As part of this drive, NNPC is
taking full advantages of all the opportunities to entrench green fuel and green energy delivery
in the country…
The NNPC as a national oil and gas company has also embarked on global warming control
measures such as striving with its joint venture (JV) partners to achieve gas flare-down in all its
operations
NNPC is also targeting the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) projects by establishing
CDM Working Groups that will project the NNPC into international Carbon Trading to reduce
carbon emission.
Further, the company has a commitment to social responsibility and highlights its “annual national
quiz competition for secondary schools across the country.”79
76
See: http://nigerialng.com/NLNGnew/environment/EIA+For+NLNGPlus/
Description+Of+The+Environment.htm.
77 See: http://nigerialng.com/NLNGnew/environment/EIA+For+NLNGPlus/Mitigation.htm.
78 See: http://www.nnpcgroup.com/PublicRelations/InformationDesk/AGreenEnvironment.aspx.
79 See: http://www.nnpcgroup.com/NNPCBUSINESS/BusinessInformation
/CorporateSocialResponsibility.aspx.
144
Local level
In addition to its upstream joint ventures in the Niger Delta, as described above, NNPC also has a
number of subsidiary companies operating in the region which have relevance to biodiversity
including the following:
 Nigerian Petroleum Development Company Limited (NPDC) is “engaged in Oil & Gas
Exploration and Production activities in the hydrocarbon-rich regions of coastal Nigeria, both
onshore and offshore; and more recently, around Equatorial Guinea.” Further, NPDC has a
stated commitment to Community Development Assistance.80
 National Petroleum Investment Management Services (NAPIMS) “manages government
investments in the upstream to ensure a good margin in its investments through effective
supervision of the JV, PSC, SC Companies using best industry practices.” Further, “NAPIMs
as a responsible corporate citizen ensures adequate returns on government investments, and
adopts global standards and best practices to ensure that operations are carried out in an
environmentally conducive manner.”81
 Pipelines And Products Marketing Company Limited (PPMC) ensures “security of supply
of petroleum products to the domestic market at low operating costs” primarily through
transport of crude oil via pipelines from the NAPIMS to the NNPC local refineries.82
Though there is evidence of a commitment to social responsibility among these subsidiary companies,
they do not profile their support for biodiversity. Nevertheless, there is a potential opportunity to
engage these companies along with NNPC’s joint venture companies in a partnership to mainstream
biodiversity into the O&G sector in the Niger Delta.
2.10 Overall assessment
At the corporate level, all of the international O&G companies operating in joint ventures with NNPC
in the Niger Delta show some commitment to biodiversity conservation. Further, there is a general
recognition that the biodiversity guidance provided by the IPIECA 83 is the industry standard to which
they should adhere. In particular, reference is made to the IPIECA guidance on developing
Biodiversity Action Plans.84 This provides a solid policy basis for developing their commitments to
biodiversity in the Niger Delta.
The one critical exception at the corporate level is the NNPC, the major shareholder of all O&G
operations in the Niger Delta. NNPC does not have an explicit biodiversity policy or commitment.
However, its stated commitment to a ‘Green Environment’ even though it is focused on carbon
emissions, does provide a basis for the company to develop its position and actions with regard to
biodiversity.
At the local level in the Niger Delta, however, though there is action on the part of some of the
international companies, there is clearly much more that could be done. Why there is so little
biodiversity action on the ground is probably due to a number of factors, including the legacy of their
80
See: http://www.npdc-ng.com/.
See: http://www.napims.com/aboutus.html.
82 See: http://www.nnpcgroup.com/NNPCBusiness/Subsidiaries/PPMC.aspx.
83 See: http://www.ipieca.org/focus-area/biodiversity.
84 See: http://www.ipieca.org/system/files/publications/baps.pdf.
81
145
licenses to operate, which goes back decades, long before biodiversity responsibility was on the
agenda. Further, biodiversity action has generally focused on traditional conservation projects, and
thus can be seen to compete for attention against more pressing community development needs.85
Finally, as the NNPC subsidiary NAPMIS so clearly states it,86 maximising profits for the
Government is the priority:
NAPIMS’ objective is to enhance the Margin accruing to the Federal Government through
effective supervision of the Joint venture companies, Production sharing companies and
Service Companies through adequate supervision of Budgets and Performance and ranking of
projects that gives higher returns on investment to Federal Government.
Thus the challenges facing any initiative aiming to mainstream biodiversity into the O&G sector in
the Niger Delta are daunting. Political and economic priorities have traditionally kept biodiversity off
of the agenda. Further, the perception of biodiversity as an environmental issue and not as a social
issue, or more precisely as a sustainable development issue, has meant that it has had to compete with
other pressing social development issues.
Nonetheless, there are significant opportunities for biodiversity embedded in the structural set up of
the O&G sector in the Niger Delta. Building off of the well-established joint venture model for
upstream operations in the region, a biodiversity partnership programme could be initiated. Such a
programme could benefit from both the leadership of the NNPC with respect to the responsible
management of the country’s O&G reserves and from the biodiversity commitments and experiences
of NNPC’s international joint venture partners.
In short, within the O&G sector there is the potential commitment and capacity to establish a
substantive ‘Niger Delta Biodiversity Partnership Programme’ that would contribute to both
biodiversity and sustainable social development in the region.
3. PROSPECTS FOR EFFECTIVE INDUSTRY ENGAGEMENT
Product: Assess companies’ willingness to join together in a compact to contribute to a
Biodiversity Trust Fund and to establish biodiversity-mainstreamed siting agreements
It is not possible to fully assess the willingness of companies to contribute individually or ‘together in
a compact’ to a Biodiversity Trust Fund or related siting agreements without having a clear idea of
how the Trust Fund will be structured.
Nevertheless, with regard to the potential incentive mechanisms highlighted in the Section 4 below, it
is possible to consider various drivers that will need to be addressed to build a ‘business case’ for
biodiversity action. These include the following:
-
Government regulations
Government relations
Investor requirements
85
As developed later in this paper, this is a false dichotomy as a more holistic approach to biodiversity as set out by the
Convention on Biological Diversity will enable the companies to integrate responsible conservation and community actions
as they relate to the sustainable and equitable use of biological resources.
86 See: http://www.napims.com/aboutus.html.
146
-
Supply chain sustainability
Corporate social responsibility
3.1 Government regulations
Current environmental law in Nigeria would most likely support biodiversity action by the O&G
sector in the Niger Delta. However, there may well be discussions about the appropriate modalities
and incentives to encourage and implement such action. According to at least one source,87 the key
environmental laws to consider are as follows:
The basis of environmental policy in Nigeria is contained in the 1999 Constitution of the Federal
Republic of Nigeria. Pursuant to section 20 of the Constitution, the State is empowered to protect and
improve the environment and safeguard the water, air and land, forest and wildlife of Nigeria. In
addition to this, section 2 of the Environmental Impact Assessment Act of 1992 (EIA Act) provides
that the public or private sector of the economy shall not undertake or embark on or authorise projects
or activities without prior consideration of the effect on the environment.
The Federal Government of Nigeria has promulgated various laws and Regulations to safeguard the
Nigerian environment. These include:
-
Federal Environmental Protection Agency Act of 1988 (FEPAAct). The following
Regulations were made pursuant to the FEPAAct:
National Environmental Protection (Effluent Limitation) Regulations:
National Environmental Protection (Pollution Abatement in Industries and Facilities
Generating Wastes) Regulations; and
National Environmental Protection (Management of Solid and Hazardous Wastes)
Regulations.
Environmental Impact Assessment Act of 1992 (EIA Act).
Harmful Wastes (Special Criminal Provisions etc.) Act of 1988 (Harmful Wastes Act).
Another important potential source of government regulation which could drive biodiversity action by
the O&G sector is the proposed Petroleum Industry Bill.88 With respect to biodiversity action, the key
fundamental objectives of this Bill are:
Environment and Air Quality Emissions
(1) The Federal Government shall, to the extent practicable, honour international environmental
obligations and shall promote energy efficiency, the provision of reliable energy, and a taxation
policy that encourages fuel efficiency by producers and consumers. (2) In accordance with the
provisions of subsection (1) of this section, the Federal Government shall introduce and enforce
integrated health, safety and environmental quality management systems with specific quality,
effluent and emission targets for oil and gas related pollutants, without regard for fuel type such as
gas, liquid or solid, in order to ensure compliance with international standards.
Community Development
The Federal Government shall, in co-operation with the state and local governments and
communities, encourage and ensure the peace and development of the petroleum producing areas of
the Federation through the implementation of specific projects aimed at ameliorating the negative
impacts of petroleum activities.
87
88
See: http://www.mondaq.com/article.asp?articleid=53804.
See: http://www.nnpcgroup.com/PublicRelations/PetroleumIndustryBill.aspx.
147
Regarding objective 6 above, the international environmental obligations include the Convention on
Biological Diversity and the other multilateral biodiversity conventions such as the Ramsar
Convention on Wetlands. Regarding objective 7, supporting the sustainable and equitable use of
biological resources should encourage both peace and development.
3.2 Government relations
In the areas of biodiversity and development, there are many strategies and actions that national
governments are striving to implement and to which biodiversity actions could play a significant role.
Such support goes beyond government regulation, and offers opportunities for the companies to have
collaborative, positive relations with government – at federal, state and local levels. In particular,
activities in support for Nigeria’s National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP)89 and
targeted biodiversity plans for the Niger Delta could be a basis for strengthening a company’s
relations with the government. Of particular relevance for government relations in the Niger Delta is
the work of the Niger Delta Development Commission90 which already has a number of O&G
companies as its partners for sustainable development and the recently established Ministry of Niger
Delta Affairs.91 The Ministry’s Department of Environmental Management92 has a mission statement
which is most compatible with biodiversity action by the O&G sector:
To restore, conserve and protect the environment and the natural resources of the Niger Delta region
and provide effective means of integrating environmental concerns into planning and decision making
process for sustainable development of the region.
3.3 Investor requirements
As important for business as regulations – notably for large-scale business projects in developing
countries – are the social and environmental requirements mandated by investors. For example, the
Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC) requires of its borrowers that “plans for projects
with particularly large potential adverse impact must be accompanied by detailed environmental
management plans.”93
Perhaps the most influential biodiversity and development-related investor requirements are the
International Finance Corporation’s (IFC) Performance Standards on Social and Environmental
Sustainability:
1: Social and Environmental Assessment and Management Systems
2: Labor and Working Conditions
3: Pollution Prevention and Abatement
4: Community Health, Safety and Security
5: Land Acquisition and Involuntary Resettlement
6: Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Natural Resource Management
7: Indigenous Peoples
8: Cultural Heritage
89
See: http://www.cbd.int/doc/world/ng/ng-nbsap-01-en.doc.
See: http://www.nddc.gov.ng/.
91 See: http://ministryofnigerdeltaaffairs.gov.ng/.
92 See: http://ministryofnigerdeltaaffairs.gov.ng/deptenvironmanagement.php.
93 Japan Bank for International Cooperation Guidelines for Confirmation of Environmental and Social Considerations (July
2009), p. 16. See:
http://www.jbic.go.jp/en/about/environment/guideline/business/pdf/pdf_01.pdf.
90
148
Though all are directly relevant to the four core biodiversity objectives – conservation, sustainability,
equity and development – Performance Standard 6 is particularly important. For example, the
following two paragraphs clearly provide a basis for financing biodiversity management plans of
areas ‘outside the fence’:
“8. Mitigation measures will be designed to achieve no net loss of biodiversity where feasible, and
may include a combination of actions, such as:
- Post-operation restoration of habitats
- Offset of losses through the creation of ecologically comparable area(s) that is managed for
biodiversity
- Compensation to direct users of biodiversity”
“14. The client will manage renewable natural resources in a sustainable manner. Where possible, the
client will demonstrate the sustainable management of the resources through an appropriate system of
independent certification.”94
The IFC’s Performance Standards – which will be updated again in 2011 – are particularly influential
because they have been adopted by the Equator Principles Association, which represents 67
multinational banks responsible for most of the project finance in developing countries. The recently
adopted Governance Rules of the Association state the following, and provide a solid investment
basis for biodiversity action:
“b) The aim of the Principles is to introduce good practice for financial institutions in the
management of social and environmental risks when providing Project Finance loans or Project
Finance Advisory Services.”
“c) The Principles are a framework to require the implementation of standards of good practice in
relation to the social and environmental issues arising in projects that are the subject of Project
Finance. The EPFIs having so decided, the Equator Principles specify that the current standards
required shall be either:
i) The Performance Standards and the Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines of the IFC where
projects are located in countries that are not High Income OECD countries (as defined by the World
Bank Development Indicators Database), or
ii) Local or national law relating to social and environmental matters where projects are located in
High Income OECD Countries (as defined by the World Bank Development Indicators Database).”
“d) The Principles apply where the EPFIs provide Project Finance loans or Project Finance Advisory
Services for projects having a total capital cost of US$ 10 million or more, to provide that those
projects are developed in a socially responsible manner and reflect sound environmental management
practices. Negative impacts on project-affected ecosystems and communities should be avoided
where possible, and if these impacts are unavoidable, they should be reduced, mitigated and/or
compensated for appropriately.”95
94
IFC Performance Standard 6. (30 April 2006). See:
http://www.ifc.org/ifcext/sustainability.nsf/AttachmentsByTitle/pol_PerformanceStandards2006_PS6/$FILE/PS_6_BiodivC
onservation.pdf.
95 The Equator Principles Association Governance Rules. (April 2010). See:
http://www.equator-principles.com/documents/EP_Governance_Rules_April_2010.pdf.
149
3.4 Supply chain security
Biodiversity actions that are undertaken in terms of the biodiversity and development objectives of
the Convention on Biological Diversity should help to ensure the security of O&G supply chains in
the Niger Delta. Though biodiversity management is more often associated with supply chain security
in the agricultural sector,96 when the critical livelihood issues related to the sustainable and equitable
use of biological resources by neighbouring communities are considered, then supply chain security
issues are equally important for the O&G sector. For example, a 2006 report97 from an IUCN
Commission scoping mission concluded that:
Rural communities in the Niger Delta have suffered most of the environmental and social costs of 50
years of oil development, and claim to have received very little of the benefits. This is a significant
contributor to the current violence, sabotage of pipelines/installations and instability in the region.
3.5 Corporate social responsibility
Though related to the government-relations discussion above in Section 2, corporate social
responsibility (CSR) is a much broader concept that embraces corporate commitment, action and
indeed leadership for social and environmental priorities. The European Commission, for example,
defines CSR as “"a concept whereby companies integrate social and environmental concerns in their
business operations and in their interaction with their stakeholders on a voluntary basis."98 And in its
2006 Communication on CSR (COM(2006) 136 final), the Commission also addresses the
international dimension of CSR, which is of particular relevance to a biodiversity action in the Niger
Delta, stating that it “will continue to promote CSR globally with a view to maximising the
contribution of enterprises to the achievement of the UN Millennium Development Goals.” For the
multinationals operating the Delta, the BAPs could play a significant role in strengthening their CSR
positions globally.
Various international business organisations today are also addressing biodiversity for the reasons
stated in this section, including CSR. The World Business Council for Sustainable Development
promotes “the development and uptake of best practice mitigation and market-based approaches that
support the sustainable management and use of ecosystems services – both on a standalone basis and
in cooperation with other stakeholders.”99 The International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) Business
Charter for Sustainable Development includes a commitment “to contribute to the development of
public policy and to business, governmental and intergovernmental programmes and educational
initiatives that will enhance environmental awareness and protection.”100 The UN Global Compact
and Duke University have developed an Environmental Stewardship Strategy which includes a
commitment by business to “translate best practices into processes and practices that are applicable in
the diverse geographies in which they operate.”101 There may indeed be opportunities to position a
BAP as a useful mechanism for implementing the CSR-related programmes of such international
business organisations.
96
See for example this report from British American Tobacco:
http://online.hemscottir.com/ir/bats/ar_2008/download/pdf/supply_chain.pdf.
97
http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/niger_delta_natural_resource_damage_assessment_and_restoration_project_recommendation.doc.
98
See: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/sustainable-business
/corporate-social-responsibility/index_en.htm.
99 See the WBCSD Ecosystem Focus Area at: http://www.wbcsd.org/.
100 See: http://www.iccwbo.org/policy/environment/id1309/index.html.
101 See: http://www.nicholasinstitute.duke.edu/globalcompact/?q=ex_sum.
150
At the national level, as noted in the review of O&G companies above, there is indeed a degree of
CSR in practice particularly with respect to social development projects. However, as one writer
recently noted,102 Nigeria still has a long way to go in this respect:
Corporate social responsibility in Nigeria is too weak; while many companies post super profits they
are unwilling to invest in social services such as education, health, roads, security and so on of the
community. However, this happens all over the world where the capitalist spirit has full taken roots.
The problem in Nigeria is that we always like to copy the wrong things, those things that give us a
leeway, an escape route. There is need to mainstream corporate responsibility and begin to get big
and medium scale enterprise to understanding that the spirit of generous giving is part of capitalist
ethic, strip of this, capitalism becomes a banal and anachronistic economic Darwinism which
undermines all peoples and communities.
Biodiversity action could provide a real opportunity for both multinational companies and Nigerian
companies, notably the NNPC, to improve their CSR performance.
4. INDUSTRY ENGAGEMENT MECHANISMS
Product: Identify potential incentive mechanisms for engaging the industry in the project
4.1 Key incentive mechanisms
The key incentive mechanism for engaging the industry in the project is to base the project on the
objectives and priorities of the Convention on Biological Diversity in the context of the conservation
and development challenges and opportunities in the Niger Delta. Focusing on the Convention
enables the O&G sector to adopt a standard approach to biodiversity that is agreed not only by the
Government of Nigeria but by more than 190 other nations (though unfortunately not yet by the
USA). Focusing on the biodiversity challenges and opportunities on the ground in the Niger Delta
will enable the O&G sector to engage with local communities in terms of their needs and capacities to
deliver biodiversity management.
In this respect, another key incentive mechanism is to have an agreed approach for O&G company
Biodiversity Action Plans (BAPs) for the Niger Delta. Such a BAP should be based directly on the
objectives and guidance provided by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the decisions
of its Parties. In this regard, this section highlights some key areas for consideration in developing a
CBD-based standard for the O&G sector. Together these areas constitute the core elements of a
logical approach to biodiversity action in the region.
4.2 Biodiversity action objectives
A BAP for the O&G sector should focus on the geographically-defined areas where the extractive
activities occur, as well as on the ‘upstream’ and ‘downstream’ areas affected by these activities. The
management of these areas should be compliant with the objectives and priorities of the CBD. In
particular, it should focus on the following four objectives:
102
See: http://www.nigeriavillagesquare.com/
index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=14335&catid=132&Itemid=181.
151
Conservation
Sustainability
Equity
Development
‘Conservation’ refers to the first CBD objective, “the conservation of biological diversity” (Article
1). In the context of a BAP, it explicitly refers to ‘in-situ conservation,’ which is defined as “the
conservation of ecosystems and natural habitats and the maintenance and recovery of viable
populations of species in their natural surroundings and, in the case of domesticated or cultivated
species, in the surroundings where they have developed their distinctive properties” (Article 2).
‘Sustainability’ refers to the second CBD objective, “the sustainable use of its components” (Article
1). This means “the use of components of biological diversity in a way and at a rate that does not lead
to the long-term decline of biological diversity, thereby maintaining its potential to meet the needs
and aspirations of present and future generations” (Article 2).
‘Equity’ refers to the third CBD objective, “the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out
of the utilization of genetic resources, including by appropriate access to genetic resources and by
appropriate transfer of relevant technologies, taking into account all rights over those resources and to
technologies, and by appropriate funding” (Article 1). For a BAP, as appropriate, the management
plan should also address the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising out of the utilization of all
components of biodiversity.
‘Development’ refers to the recognition of the CBD “that economic and social development and
poverty eradication are the first and overriding priorities of developing countries” and that
“conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity is of critical importance for meeting the
food, health and other needs of the growing world population, for which purpose access to and
sharing of both genetic resources and technologies are essential” (Preamble). Hence, for a BAP for an
O&G company in the Niger Delta, development outcomes need to be an integral part of the plan.
The BAP should not just focus on conserving biodiversity (CBD objective 1), but also on using
biological resources sustainably, ensuring that such uses are equitable and, for projects in developing
countries, ensuring that the projects generate development outcomes (CBD objectives 2 and 3 plus
preamble commitments).
4.2 Biodiversity action components
A BAP should, as appropriate, address the following four components of biodiversity:
Ecological complexes
Ecosystems
Species
Biological resources
‘Ecological complex’ is highlighted in the CBD definition of biodiversity: “the variability among
living organisms from all sources including, inter alia, terrestrial, marine and other aquatic
ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which they are part; this includes diversity within
species, between species and of ecosystems” (Article 2). For a BAP for an O&G company, an
ecological complex is a ‘geographically-defined area’ as this term is used in the definition of a
‘protected area’ as “a geographically defined area which is designated or regulated and managed to
152
achieve specific conservation objectives” (Article 2). In some cases, it may be appropriate to refer to
an ecological complex simply as a ‘landscape’, a ‘seascape’, or an ‘area’.
‘Ecosystem’ is a key component of biodiversity and is defined as “a dynamic complex of plant,
animal and micro-organism communities and their non-living environment interacting as a functional
unit” (Article 2). Also relevant to a BAP is the somewhat related term ‘habitat,’ which is defined as
"the place or type of site where an organism or population naturally occurs” (Article 2).
‘Species’ is a component of biodiversity, but it is not explicitly defined in the CBD. However,
‘domesticated or cultivated species’ is defined as “species in which the evolutionary process has
been influenced by humans to meet their needs” (Article 2). For a BAP, however, it may be useful to
have a working definition of this term as well as such terms as native, alien, exotic, and invasive
species.
‘Biological resources,’ are defined as ‘genetic resources, organisms or parts thereof, populations, or
any other biotic component of ecosystems with actual or potential use or value for humanity’ (Article
2). Further, ‘genetic resources’ are defined separately as “genetic material of actual or potential
value” where ‘genetic material’ is in turn defined as “any material of plant, animal, microbial or
other origin containing functional units of heredity” (Article 2).
Importantly, the BAP should adopt and use the terms defined in Article 2 of the CBD as well as terms
defined in the other biodiversity-related international conventions to ensure that BAP’s developed
anywhere apply the same terms with the same understanding of what these terms mean. 103 These
terms would be listed in Appendix A of the guide as outlined above.
4.4 A biodiversity action matrix
Ecological
Complexes
Ecosystems
Species
Biological
resources
Conservation
Sustainability
Equity
Development
The four objectives of a BAP can be combined with the four biodiversity components to provide a
biodiversity management matrix for a geographically-defined area. A BAP for an O&G project
should, as appropriate, address what it could deliver in each of the 16 cells in this matrix. Depending
on the “ecological, genetic, social, economic, scientific, educational, cultural, recreational and
aesthetic values” (Preamble) of a particular area, however, some of the cells may be of critical
importance to its management, while others may be of less or little importance. Further, as discussed
below, such a matrix should be applied for the different stages in a project’s lifecycle.
4.5 Biodiversity management methodologies
For example, the term ‘biodiversity’ can either refer to ecological complexes and the diversity of ecosystems and species
in them as defined by the CBD or it can refer to the diversity of species or degree of endemism of an area which if high
might be called a biodiversity ‘hot spot’. The latter definition, though useful for some scientific purposes, is substantively
different than the official CBD definition.
103
153
Various relevant methodologies – including commitments, guidelines and tools – have already been
developed and formally accepted by the Parties to the CBD, and thus are already available for use in
developing a CBD-compliant management plans. Other methodologies have been developed and
accepted by the Parties to other biodiversity-relevant agreements and could be appropriate for use
under an O&G BAP. Still other methodologies have been developed voluntarily and could also be
applied if appropriate to the situation.
CBD-approved methodologies
The text of the CBD itself, as well as the subsequent decisions of the COPs, provides approved aims,
approaches, guidance and terminology which would form the methodological basis for CBDcompliant management plans. Perhaps of most importance for a BAP is the ecosystem approach.
COP7 decision VII/11 recognised “the ecosystem approach as the primary framework for addressing
the three objectives of the Convention in a balanced way.” This followed on from COP 5 decision
V/6 which adopted the ecosystem approach as “a strategy for the integrated management of land,
water and living resources that promotes conservation and sustainable use in an equitable way.” In
this decision, the Parties also set out 12 “complementary and interlinked” principles of the ecosystem
approach. Further, in response to COP decision VII/11, the CBD Secretariat also maintains an online
Ecosystem Approach Sourcebook104 that provides useful, detailed guidance on how to create
management plans.
Further, with respect to the conservation objective, Article 8 of the CBD addresses in-situ
conservation and includes commitments such as “regulate or manage biological resources important
for the conservation of biological diversity whether within or outside protected areas, with a view to
ensuring their conservation and sustainable use” and “development and implementation of plans or
other management strategies.”
The objective of sustainable use is addressed in Article 10, which includes commitments by the
Parties to “support local populations to develop and implement remedial action in degraded areas
where biological diversity has been reduced” and “encourage cooperation between its governmental
authorities and its private sector in developing methods for sustainable use of biological resources.”
By COP decision VII/12 (paragraph 1), the Parties also adopted the Addis Ababa Principles and
Guidelines for the Sustainable use of Biodiversity and called for “integrating and mainstreaming
the Addis Ababa Principles and Guidelines into a range of measures including policies, programmes,
national legislation and other regulations, sectoral and cross-sectoral plans and programmes
addressing consumptive and non consumptive use of components of biological diversity.”
Further guidance on implementation of the CBD with respect to specific objectives, specific
ecosystems, and specific economic sectors has also been formally approved by the Parties and could
be included in a more thorough compilation of approved methodologies for developing CBDcompliant management plans.
Methodologies of biodiversity-related agreements
Other conventions and agreements related to biodiversity have also developed commitments,
guidelines and tools, which could serve as useful methodologies for developing BAP’s. For example,
under the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, its Parties adopted Resolution VII.16, which adopts a
104
See: http://www.cbd.int/ecosystem/sourcebook/.
154
set of Principles and guidelines for wetland restoration that “provide a step-by-step process
guiding the identification, development and implementation of a restoration project.” This guidance
may be particularly appropriate for BAPs in the Niger Delta.
Another opportunity might be to explore establishing possible linkages between a BAP and the
establishment of a UNESCO Man and Biosphere (MAB) site.105 The MAB Programme has been in
operation since the early 19070s and today, it is active in more than 100 countries with over 500 listed
sites – some of which may include extractives projects – which: “provide context-specific
opportunities to combine scientific knowledge and governance modalities to:
-
Reduce biodiversity loss;
Improve livelihoods; and
Enhance social, economic and cultural conditions for environmental sustainability.”
Regarding sustainable use, a BAP in some instances might also benefit from collaboration with the
UNCTAD BioTrade Initiative106 and its Principles and Criteria which are also based on the objectives
of the CBD. Methodologies approved by Parties to other biodiversity-related conventions and
developed by intergovernmental programmes such as the BioTrade Initiative relating to such topics as
conserving the habitats of endangered and migratory species, carbon storage and sequestration, and
sustainable land management could be compiled for review and possible inclusion in the updated
guide for BAPs in the Niger Delta.
Relevant voluntary methodologies
There are also a number of reputable voluntary standards, guidelines and tools in addition to those
above that could perhaps be used under a BAP. A selection of these follows:
-
Climate, Community and Biodiversity standards
Corporate Ecosystem Review
Ecosystem Service Benchmark
Fairtrade Labelling Organisation standards
Forest Stewardship Council standards
The Gold Standard
ISO 14001 Environmental Management Standard
IUCN Red List
Marine Aquarium Council standards
Marine Stewardship Council standards
Rainforest Alliance certification schemes
Union for Ethical BioTrade
Such methodologies could be reviewed for possible inclusion in BAP.
4.6 BAP geographical scope
The immediate focus of a BAP should be on mitigating the biodiversity impact of its operations
‘inside the fence’— i.e. in the areas under their direct management responsibility. In this respect, the
BAP may want to include the guidance developed under the Business and Biodiversity Offset
105
See: http://portal.unesco.org/science/en/
ev.php-URL_ID=6393&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html.
106 See: http://www.biotrade.org/.
155
Programme (BBOP)107 with respect to implementing a mitigation hierarchy as outlined in the
following figure:
Regarding biodiversity actions ‘outside the fence’ these could include like-for-like offsets of specific
direct impacts as proposed by BBOP. They could also include broader mitigation of the indirect
impact of the value chains of the O&G companies as proposed in the discussion of a Niger Delta
Biodiversity Trust in the following section.
5. CAPITALIZATION PLAN FOR THE TRUST FUND
Product: Outline a capitalization plan for the Trust Fund proposed under the project’s
component 3
Currently there is no existing trust fund for biodiversity conservation in the region. Thus this section
is to be completed at a later date, once a Trust Fund structure has been agreed upon.
However, based on experience from Conservation Trust Funds established elsewhere, potential
donors to a Conservation Trust Fund for the Niger Delta region might include international and
Nigerian NGOs, oil and gas companies, and private sector companies using biological resources, such
as pharmaceutical companies, or whose operations have an direct impact on local biological diversity,
such as other extractive industries in the region. Other contributions could come from international
organisations, individuals, international and domestic banks and other corporate organizations.
Contributions could be raised either from direct donation or from government-imposed regulations,
such as environmental taxes, fees for use of environmental resources, fines for failing to comply with
environmental law, or compensation for environmental damage.
Further incentives for private sector contributions to a Conservation Trust Fund can be drawn from
the discussion under Section 3 of this paper. Examples detailed in the section include fulfilling CSR
commitments, improving corporate image, offsetting supply chain impacts and securing sustainable
107
See: http://bbop.forest-trends.org/.
156
supply chain inputs, satisfying investor requirements, and improving relations with local and federal
governments.
Finally, specifically with respect to securing additional voluntary funding from the O&G sector, one
practical approach could be to agree of a target of a certain percentage of turnover or income from the
O&G operations in the Niger Delta. This could be modelled on the commitment of developed
countries to allocate 0.7% of national income to development assistance.108 For the O&G sector, a
similar commitment could be envisioned. For example, for every $1 billion of revenue generated by
the sector in the Delta, 0.7% or $7,000,000 could be allocated to biodiversity management projects in
the Delta. This funding could be managed by a Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust as described in the
following section.
6. INITIAL INDUSTRY ENGAGEMENT PLAN
Product: Compile the Initial Industry Engagement Plan: Propose a plan with clear
recommendations for the engagement of the O&G industry in the project and in its
objectives
6.1 Three key steps to engaging the O&G sector
Three key steps are proposed as follows:
Step One – Produce a guide to developing BAPs in the O&G sector in the Niger Delta
Step Two – Undertake on-going independent reviews of existing BAPs and biodiversity-related
activities to assess progress to date and to identify opportunities for strengthening existing plans and
actions and for establishing new BAPs.
Step Three – Establish a ‘Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust’ to support ‘outside the fence’ investments
by the sector in independently-verified biodiversity management plans for geographically-defined
areas, as part of their BAPs.
6.2 Step One – Producing an O&G BAP guide for the Niger Delta
Based on the IPIECA Oct 2005 guide – which is widely adopted by the industry – an immediate
project activity should be to produce an updated, revised guide focused on the Niger Delta such as
indicated in the following table:
IPIECA 2005 guide
Proposed UNDP/GEF Niger Delta guide
1. Understanding Biodiversity
1. Understanding
objectives
biodiversity
–
Components
and
2. What is a Biodiversity Action Plan?
2. What is a Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP)?
2.1 What is the relationship between BAPs and other
biodiversity action plans?
Revise presentation in light of ESIA, EMP, etc as used by
2.2 What is the relationship between a BAP and an ESIA the sector in Nigeria
or EMP?
108
See: http://www.unmillenniumproject.org/press/07.htm.
157
IPIECA 2005 guide
Proposed UNDP/GEF Niger Delta guide
3. Deciding if a BAP is mandatory, necessary or
recommended
3.1 Legal, regulatory, planning, permitting or third party
requirements
3.1.1 Legal and regulatory requirements
3.1.2 Planning and permitting requirements
3.1.3 Third party requirements
3.2 Presence of significant observed or predicted
biodiversity impacts
3.2.1 Preliminary desktop assessment
3.2.2 Baseline survey of biodiversity
3.2.3 Biodiversity impact assessment
3.3 Business benefits and the business case for a BAP
3. Why have a BAP?
3.1 Government regulations
3.2 Government relations [note: where reference to a
NBSAP comes in]
3.3 Investor requirements
3.4 Supply chain security
3.5 Corporate social responsibility
4. Preparing and Implementing a BAP
4.1 Prerequisites
4.2 Preparation of the BAP
4.2.1 Establishment of priorities for conservation
4.2.2 Identification of conservation action
4.3 Implementation of the BAP
4.4 Monitoring, evaluation and improvement
4.5 Reporting, communicating and verification
4. Preparing and implementing a BAP
4.1 Preliminary assessment including a biodiversity
baseline survey
4.2 Preparation of the BAP
4.2.1 Establishing biodiversity priorities
- ‘inside the fence’ and ‘outside the fence’
- development/construction phase, operations phase,
closure/decommissiong phase
- stakeholder consultations
4.2.2 Establish biodiversity actions
4.3 Implementing the BAP
4.4 Monitoring, evaluation and reporting
4.5 Independent verification and adaptive management
5. Stakeholder engagement and partnerships
biodiversity
5.1 Stakeholder engagement and consultation
5.2 Development of partnerships
Our approach should assume that all companies will have
a BAP for their operations in the Delta and this chapter
will provide the rationale
for 5. Niger Delta biodiversity partnerships
5.1 Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust
5.2 Stakeholder engagement
Company Case Studies
1. Shell
2. Chevron
3. EnCana
4. BP
5. ConocoPhillips
6. Best practices in the Niger Delta
APPENDIX 1. Glossary and Acronyms
APPENDIX 1. Glossary and acronyms
Allow the companies to profile good work done to date as
examples of best practice
Important and should be based on terms as officially
defined under the CBD and other multilateral conventions,
as appropriate.
APPENDIX 2. Further resources
APPENDIX 2. Further resources
A. Contacts, potential partners and sources of further
information
Perhaps also on a website so that it can be updated
B. Annotated bibliography
throughout the life of the UNDP/GEF project
APPENDIX 3. Variation in BAP activities according to Incorporate this topic into Chapter 4 above.
industrial life cycle stage
158
Such a guide would need to be developed in consultation with all stakeholders including
representatives of the O&G sector, Government and local communities. Once finalised it would serve
as the ‘bible’ for planning and implementing responsible biodiversity actions by the O&G companies.
6.3 Step Two – Independent reviews of O&G BAPs
With the guide and the Trust outline in Step Three, it will be possible for the UNDP/GEF project to
establish Independent Review Panels for the O&G companies which would be tasked with reviewing
their biodiversity plans and actions and would be empowered to propose how to strengthen these new
plans and actions. Importantly, the findings and opinions of the panels would probably need to be
confidential (at least in the initial stages) so that they help the companies to identify biodiversity
opportunities rather than increase company risk.
These panels should consist of small teams of national and international experts (perhaps 4 to 6
members) with appropriate expertise including conservation biology, sustainable development,
environmental and social management, and the O&G industry. They would advise the company on
biodiversity opportunities both ‘inside’ and ‘outside the fence’. The selection of the teams could be
done jointly by the UNDP/GEF project and the O&G companies.
The teams should visit the companies once or twice a year for each of the four years of the project
and write a report to the company which would consist of two parts – a general report which the
company could, if they chose to, share with others including the shareholders and a ‘letter to
management’ about issues arising which might be sensitive in nature and require more investigation
than was possible in a short visit of an independent review panel.
A portion of the staff time could perhaps be covered by the UNDP/GEF project while the companies
could cover transportation, accommodation and related logistical arrangements.
6.4 Step Three – A Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust
A key component of the project would be to develop a ‘Niger Delta Biodiversity Trust’109 which
would help the O&G sector to invest in independently-verified biodiversity management plans for
geographically-defined areas ‘outside the fence’. In a sense, such an area might be considered a
‘protected area plus (PA+)’ in that it would deliver conservation plus sustainability plus equity plus
development in specific areas within the Niger Delta. Its main role would be to enable the O&G
sector to mitigate the biodiversity impacts of the value chains by supporting local biodiversity
management of specific areas and in so doing aim to have an overall net positive impact, both in
terms of biodiversity and social development, in the Niger Delta.
Importantly, the Trust could explicitly help to
identify key areas to be managed;
work with the appropriate area authorities to develop biodiversity management plans (covering the
four biodiversity objectives set out above);
facilitate independent third-party verification of these plans; and
identify the funding needs of the areas which in turn could be supported by the O&G sector.
109
Note: This is a possible construction the Conservation Trust model currently under consideration in this project. It is
modelled in part on the illustration presented in UNEP/CBD/COP/10/INF/15 - Innovative Financial Mechanisms - The
GDM 2010 Initiative Report. See: http://gdm.earthmind.net/2010-10-nagoya/cop-10-inf-15-en.pdf.
159
Core funding for the Trust and its activities could come from the GEF grant, with the companies
directly investing in the area-based management plans. In this respect, an appropriate level of
investment by the companies would need to be agreed as discussed in Section 5 above.
Annex 5. Fauna of the Niger Delta: Additional Information
Mammals
The Delta is home to all of Nigeria's endemic or near-endemic mammal species and to six
IUCN Red List mammals: the (Niger Delta) forest elephant (Loxodonta Africana cyclotis),
the West African manatee (Trichechus senegalensis), the White-throated guenon
(Cercopithecus erythrogaster), the Sclater’s guenon (Cercopithecus sclateri), the pygmy
hippopotamus (Choeropsis liberiensis heslopi) and the Niger Delta red colobus monkey
(Procolobus epieni), have also been recorded. The Niger Delta red colobus is one of the
world’s 25 most endangered primates.110 First discovered only in 1993, it was placed on the
list in this biennium 2008-2010 due to its very small range, bush meat hunting pressure and
widespread degradation of the Niger Delta’s forests. There is every reason to suspect that its
numbers are declining.
The one field study of the Niger Delta red colobus established that epieni occurs only in the
so-called “marsh forest” zone of the central Delta, an area that has a year-round high water
table, but does not suffer deep flooding or tidal effects. The more clumped distribution of
food species in the marsh forest was a key factor restricting the primate to its limited range of
1,500 km2, which is demarcated by the Forcados River and Bomadi Creek in the northwest,
the Sagbama, Osiama and Apoi Creeks in the east, and the mangrove belt to the south. At the
time of its discovery the Niger Delta red colobus was locally common in parts of the Delta,
but has come under intense pressure from degradation of its habitat and commercial hunting.
Artisanal loggers have felled important colobus food trees, such as Hallea ledermannii, at a
high rate. In addition, large canals dug as part of oil extraction activities, as well as smaller
canals dug by loggers into the interior swamps, are changing the local hydrology to the
detriment of these and other tree species.
The Niger Delta harbors a high diversity of primates including important populations of two
endangered species introduced above: the endemic Sclater’s guenon, and the near-endemic
White-throated guenon. Sclater’s guenon, also known as the Nigerian monkey, is found only
in the Niger Delta region. Described in the late 19th century, it was thought to be extinct by
the 1980s. A forest dwelling species, it is an endemic to the Delta forests between the River
Niger and Cross River.
Other species include Mona monkey (Cercopithecus mona), White-nosed guenon
(Cercopithecus nictitans), Tantalus monkey (Cercopithecus tantalus), Red-bellied guenon
(Cercopithecus erythrogaster) Red-eared guenon (Cercopithecus erythrotis) and Red-capped
mangabey (Cercocebus torquatus); and the Putty-nosed monkey (Cercopithecus nictitans).
All are listed as Vulnerable on the IUCN Red List. The endangered Nigeria-Cameroon
Chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes vellerosus), recognised scientifically in 2001 as a distinct subPrimates in Peril: The World’s 25 Most Endangered Primates 2008–2010. Ed. R. A. Mittermeir et. al. IUCN/SSC
Primate Specialist Group (PSG), International Primatological Society (IPS), and Conservation International (CI).
110
160
species, has a patchy distribution in the zone in the Delta, with its only populations likely in
Bayelsa state, where in 1993 there were two main population groups: the Ogbotobo beach–
ridge forest in the Dodo-Ramos estuary and the Biseni-Akpede-Asamabiri area of Taylor
creek Forest Reserve.
The Niger Delta forest elephant (Loxodonta Africana cyclotis) likely still exists in the Delta,
though recent information on population numbers and condition is not available. Known
populations now are in the Andoni district of Rivers state where a poorly managed Game
Reserve exists. The other straggler populations are possibly in Bayelsa state. The Rivers state
herd is also located on a barrier island including the Andoni Creek Forest Reserve. No recent
population counts have been made. In the early 1990s, this herd was estimated at a maximum
of twenty animals. The herd has come out several times in recent times when flooding
reduces its barrier island abode to the barest minimum. The Bayelsa state herd is known to
have had several herds of elephants, but populations have not been surveyed in the past 10
years. The last estimates of the herds inhabiting the Biseni Forest and Esibiri Lake, Odi,
Biseni-Asamabiri, beach ridge forests of the Dodo-Ramos estuaries put the population at 100
animals.
The Niger Delta pygmy hippopotamus (Choeropsis liberiensis heslopi) is essentially unstudied in recent decades and may be a distinct sub-species. The presence/absence in the
Niger Delta of this poorly documented species is unknown. The pygmy hippo has had no
confirmed sightings in the wild for many decades. Its existence, current status and
distribution require confirmation and definition by a survey of some of the most inaccessible
parts of the Delta. The nearest relative of the Delta pygmy hippo is in Liberia, several
hundred kilometers to the west.
The aquatic antelope, sitatunga (Limnotragus spekei) and the water buck (Kobus
ellipsyprimnus) occupy similar habitat, and still exist in the delta and inhabit the tangles
associated with the swamp forests. The Water chevrotain (Hyemoschus aquaticus) is the
most aquatic of antelopes and is dependent on the dense vegetation characteristic of the
swamp forests of the Niger Delta. Considered an endangered species and listed in Nigeria’s
Endangered Species Act it has widespread distribution. Bate’s dwarf antelope (Neotragus
batesi) was recorded at Nembe and Oloibiri. It is thought to be widespread and subject to
hunting. Classified as least concern by IUCN, its population in Nigeria is unknown.
Birds
The greater Niger Delta is home to eleven Important Bird Areas (see maps of these and other
species in Annex 3). About 148 water-related bird species from 38 families have been
recorded in the area. These include five species of global conservation concern, one of
which, the Anambra waxbill (Estrilda poliopareia), is endemic to Nigeria. The Anambra
waxbill is a very rare species classified as vulnerable. It was reportedly sighted and
photographed at Tombia, Bayelsa state recently. It is found in the wetter parts of the lower
reaches of the Niger to Forcados in Delta state. Three Important Bird Areas are located
within the four pilot states of the Delta: the Upper Orashi Forest, the Biseni Forests, and the
Akassa forests. One or more of these are known to be home to the Anambra waxbill, as well
as other threatened species such as the Damar tern (Sterna balaenarum), the White-tailed
161
greenbul (Baeopogon clamans), and the Dusky Crested-flycatcher (Trochocercus
nigromitratus).
Fish
The Niger Delta harbors globally outstanding fish fauna and displays exceptional
evolutionary phenomena with its higher taxonomic endemism and distinct species
assemblages with a minimum of 314 species (313 being indigenous) from 158 genera and 64
families found in the region. A remarkably high number of freshwater species (165) occur in
the Niger Delta. This number excludes permanent freshwater representatives of marine
families Denticipidae (denticle herrings) Clupeidae (herrings) and Eleotridae (sleepers). At
least twenty (20) endemic species have been recorded so far in the Delta. Unique conditions
in the Delta have nurtured the evolution of five monotypic fish Families—Denticipidae,
Pantodontidae, Phractolaemidae, Hepsetidae and Gymnarchidae—the highest concentration
of monotypic Families of any freshwater eco-region in the world. The two Families
Denticipidae and Phractolaemidae have the most restricted distribution. The denticile herring
(Denticipidae) is a freshwater representative of marine herring family. The African butterfly
fish Pantodon buchholzi (Pantodontidae) is capable of aerial respiration with its swim
bladder and also can leap out of the water for short distances and glide (FishBase 2001). A
popular aquarium species, the butterfly fish is partial to the leaf-laden seasonal wetlands of
the Niger delta. The hingemouth (Phractolaemus ansorgii) is a small freshwater fish that is
found only in west central Africa, the sole member of the Family Phractolaemidae. The
mouth can extend like a small trunk, thus the name, and has just two teeth, both in the lower
jaw. The swim bladder is alveolated and can function as a lung, allowing the species to
survive oxygen-poor waters. The Hepsetus odoe, also known as the Kafue pike, is a
predatory fish, and the only living member of the Family Hepsetidae. The monotypic genus
Gymnarchus niloticus African frankfish (Gymnarchidae) is the only member of the family.
The African arowana or Heterotis niloticus (Osteoglossidae) has its nearest relatives in the
Amazon river. H. niloticus, the only plankton-feeding osteoglossid, is the sole representative
of its genus and the only member of the sub-family Heterotinidinae. Two species of
freshwater stingray occur in the Delta, the only two freshwater stingray species in Africa:
Dasyatis garouaensis (vulnerable), which is found only in three river systems in Nigeria and
Cameroon, and the endangered thorny stingray (Urogymnus ukpam).
A detailed study of the distribution patterns of fish species in the Niger Delta showed that
their occurrence is not uniform. Instead, a dichotomy is apparent between acidic clear black
water systems (Sombreiro and New Calabar Rivers) and hard whitewater systems (Niger
River and its immediate flood-plain and the Orashi River). Black water rivers contain up to
65% forest species and only 15% savanna species. Whitewater rivers have a species
composition dominated by savanna (46.5%), although they also contain an important number
of forest species. The former are generally acidic, have a low conductivity and are very
transparent. They show little or no seasonal change in water level and have perennial densely
vegetated banks, covered with mats of aquatic grasses and macrophytes, behind which
swamp forest grows. Bottom vegetation is common and the bottom consists of fine sand,
beds of dead leaves, and anoxic organic mud. The whitewater systems are less acidic, with
higher conductivity and a low transparency. They show important changes in water levels
162
and support seasonal flood bank plain grasses; bottom vegetation is generally absent. The
current conditions in the two types of rivers provide habitats suitable to different types of
species111.
Amphibians and Reptiles
Herptofauna of the Niger Delta are not well known and remained unstudied most of the 20th
century. Old records combined with more recent studies (Akani et. al. 2003) provide a
picture of the amphibian diversity found in the Delta. Based upon old and more recent
records, it is possible to estimate that over 30 species of amphibians occur in the Delta, with
the number likely to be higher. At least two species from the Leptopelis genus occur in the
Delta (Leptopelis aubryi, L. millson). Other common species include: Phrynobatrachus
auritus, Hylarana albolabris and Chiromantis rufescenns. The Pipidae are a family of
primitive, tongueless frogs. At least three species in this family occur in the Niger Delta: the
Tropical clawed frog (Silurana tropicalis), the African dwarf frog (Hymenochirus boettgeri),
and the Western clawed frog (Xenopus tropicalis).
Four species of endangered species of sea turtle visit the beaches of the Delta and probably
breed there: the leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea), green (Chelonia mydas) and olive
ridley (Lepidochelys olivacea), loggerhead (Caretta caretta), and the critically endangered
hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata). Little information on these species in the Delta is
readily available but there of the many O&G companies operating in the area, it is highly
likely that there is more data available on these species.
At least three species from the Bufonidae family occur in the delta (i.e. Bufo maculates).
Nine species from the family Ranidae, the most widely distributed of any frog family, and at
least three species (Hyperolius concolor, H. guttulatus and Afrixalus dorsalis) from
Hyperoliidae, a family of small brightly colored frogs occur in the Delta. At least two species
of Caecilians (Geotrypetes seraphini, Herpele squalostoma) can be found in the delta.
Caecilians resemble earthworms or snakes and mostly live hidden in the ground, which
makes them one of the least known orders of amphibians. A few species such as the Western
bullfrog (Dicroglossus occipitalis) are of economic value as food and hold potential for
sustainable use.
Crocodiles: Populations of the threatened West African dwarf crocodile (Osteolaemus
tetraspis), the Nile crocodile (Crocodylus niloticus) and the slender-snouted crocodile
(Crocodylus cataphractus) and up to five species of freshwater turtles are under intense
hunting pressure. The delta remains the last stronghold of the dwarf crocodile O.tetraspis,
which is heavily traded. A complex cultural relationship between crocodiles and people in
several communities ensures that some populations of all species are strictly conserved.
Recent studies of DNA and morphology suggest that C. cataphractus may belong in its own
genus, Mecistops.
111
Thieme, M.L. et. al. 2005. Freshwater ecoregions of Africa and Madagascar: a conservation assessment. World Wildlife
Fund.
163
Annex 6. GEF4 SO2 Tracking Tool.
I. PROJECT GENERAL INFORMATION
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Project Name:
Project Type (MSP/FSP):
Project ID (GEF):
Project ID (IA):
Implementing Agency:
Country:
Niger Delta Biodiversity Project
FSP
4090
2047
UNDP
Nigeria
Name of reviewers completing tracking tool and completion dates:
Work Program Inclusion
Name
Jeffrey Griffin
Title
Lead Consultant
Mainstreaming
Expert
Agency
UNDP-GEF
Project Mid-term
Final Evaluation/project
completion
7. Project duration:
Planned_____5__ years
Actual _______ years
8. Lead Project Executing Agency (ies): UNDP and Federal Ministry of Environment
9. GEF Strategic Program:
[X ] Strengthening the policy/regulatory framework for mainstreaming biodiversity (SP4)
[ ] Fostering markets for biodiversity goods and services (SP 5)
10. Production sectors and/or ecosystem services directly targeted by project:
10. a. Please identify the main production sectors involved in the project. Please put “P” for
sectors that are primarily and directly targeted by the project, and “S” for those that are secondary
or incidentally affected by the project.
Oil & Gas___P___
Agriculture_____
Fisheries______
Forestry________
Transportation_______
Other (please specify)______
II. PROJECT LANDSCAPE/SEASCAPE COVERAGE
11. a. What is the extent (in hectares) of the landscape or seascape where the project will directly or
indirectly contribute to biodiversity conservation or sustainable use of its components?
164
Targets and Timeframe
Project Coverage
Landscape/seascape area
directly112 covered by the
project (ha)
Landscape/seascape area
indirectly113 covered by the
project (ha)
Foreseen at
project start
60,000
hectares
4,642,000
hectares
Achievement
at Mid-term
Evaluation of
Project
Achievement at
Final Evaluation
of Project
--- hectares
--- hectares
--- hectares
--- hectares
Explanation for indirect coverage numbers: The indirect coverage number is the combined area of the
four core Delta states where O&G operations are underway.
There are no federal protected areas (PAs) in the Delta. The following PAs are all State-level PAs,
most of them forest reserves, with no infrastructure, no management plans, no budgetary allocations,
no staff deployed to manage them. There is no enforcement. They are in essence, “paper parks.”
AKWA IBOM STATE
# Name
1 Stubbs Creek
Itu Swallow Roost
2
3 Ikot Uso Akpan
4 Nwanibia Game Reserve. Uruan LGA
5 Uyo Ravine
6 Obot Ndom
7 Obeaku
Sub-total
Designation
Forest Reserve
Forest Reserve
Forest Reserve
Game Reserve
Forest Reserve
Forest Reserve
Forest Reserve
BAYELSA STATE
#
Name
1
Apoi creek
2
Egbedi
3
Nun
4
Pennington
5
Taylor creek
6
Brass
7
Edumanon (Etiema/Okoroba)
8
Ikibiri Creek
9
Akassa Forests
10 Ramos-Dodo-Pennington-Digatoro
Sub-total
Designation
Forest Reserve
Forest Reserve
Forest Reserve
Forest Reserve
Forest Reserve
Forest Reserve
Forest Reserve
Forest Reserve
Forest Reserve
Forest Reserve
Area km2
310
Not determined
(ND)
ND
ND
ND
12
20
342
Area km2
64.77
66.32
122.5
Proposed/ND
22.57
Proposed/ ND
86.76
91.71
322
776.63
DELTA STATE
Direct coverage refers to the area that is targeted by the project’s site intervention. For example, a project may be
mainstreaming biodiversity into floodplain management in a pilot area of 1,000 hectares that is part of a much larger
floodplain of 10,000 hectares.
113 the project may, for example, “indirectly” cover or influence the remaining 9,000 hectares of the floodplain through
promoting learning exchanges and training at the project site as part of an awareness raising and capacity building strategy
for the rest of the floodplain. Please explain the basis for extrapolation of indirect coverage when completing this part of the
table.
112
165
#
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Name
Olague
Uremure-Yokri
Ukpe-Urhobo
Ogwashi-Uku
Ishiagu
Kwale
Akiehe
Atachi I
Atachi II
Ute-Ukpe
Akumazi-Igbodo & Idumuje-Ugboko
Iyorcha
Oko
Sub-total
Designation
Forest Reserve
Forest Reserve
Forest Reserve
Forest Reserve
Forest Reserve
Forest Reserve
Forest Reserve
Forest Reserve
Forest Reserve
Forest Reserve
Forest Reserve
Forest Reserve
Forest Reserve
Area km2
181
107
4.51
23. 31
2.93
17.2
12.95
6.01
18.31
18.13
8.75
376.79
RIVERS STATE
#
Name
1
Upper Orashi
2
Lower Orashi
3
Otamiri FR
4
Upper Imo
5
Lower Imo
6
Andoni
7
Ikodi
8
Sombreiro Mangrove Forest
Sub-total
Designation
Forest Reserve
Forest Reserve
Forest Reserve
Forest Reserve
Forest Reserve
Game Sanctuary
Bird Sanctuary
Forest Reserve
Area km2
47.67
47.67
150.44
155.28
55.7
ND
0.1
Proposed
446.86
Grand total number of km2 & hectares of State
designated areas in the Delta.
1952.27 km2
195,227
hectares
11.c. Within the landscape/seascape covered by the project, is the project
implementing payment for environmental service schemes? No.
12.a. Within the scope and objectives of the project, please identify in the table
below the management practices employed by project beneficiaries that integrate
biodiversity considerations and the area of coverage of these management practices.
Please also note if a certification system is being applied and identify the
certification system being used. Note: this could range from farmers applying
organic agricultural practices, forest management agencies managing forests per
Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) guidelines or other forest certification schemes,
artisanal fisherfolk practicing sustainable fisheries management, or industries
satisfying other similar agreed international standards, etc. An example is provided
in the table below.
166
III. MANAGEMENT PRACTICES APPLIED
Specific management practices
that integrate BD
1. Oil and gas companies
develop and adopt
biodiversity action plans
that integrate biodiversity
objectives into each phase of
the O&G project cycle, from
exploration to
decommissioning.
2. Key oil and gas law and
policies incorporate
biodiversity objectives (EIA,
oil spill response) covering
O&G operations across all
four core Delta States where
O&G operations exist.
Name of
certification
system used (NA
if none applied)
Area of coverage
foreseen at start
of project
NA
60,000
hectares
(inside the
fence)
NA
4,642,000
hectares.
IV. MARKET TRANSFORMATION
NA
167
Achievement
at Mid-term
Evaluation of
Project
Achievement at
Final
Evaluation of
Project
-- hectares
--- hectares
V. POLICY AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS
For those projects that have identified addressing policy, legislation, regulations, and their implementation as project objectives,
please complete the following series of questions: 14a, 14b, 14c.
[Guidance: For tables below, please answer YES or NO for each sector that is a focus of the project.]
14.a. Please complete this table at CEO endorsement for each sector that is a primary or a secondary focus of the project.
Please answer YES or NO to each statement under the sectors that are a focus of the project.
Sector
Oil and Gas
Statement:
Biodiversity considerations are mentioned in sector policy
Biodiversity considerations are mentioned in sector policy through
specific legislation
Biodiversity-oriented regulations are in place to implement the
legislation
The regulations are under implementation
The implementation of regulations is enforced
Enforcement of regulations is monitored
Agriculture
Fisheries
Forestry
Other
(please
specify)
No
No
No
No
No
No
14.b. Please complete this table at the project mid-term for each sector that is a primary or a secondary focus of the project.
Please answer YES or NO to each statement under the sectors that are a focus of the project.
Sector
Oil and Gas
Statement:
Biodiversity considerations are mentioned in sector policy
Biodiversity considerations are mentioned in sector policy through
specific legislation
Biodiversity-oriented regulations are in place to implement the
legislation
168
Agriculture
Fisheries
Forestry
Other
(please
specify)
Sector
Oil and Gas
Agriculture
Fisheries
Forestry
Statement:
The regulations are under implementation
The implementation of regulations is enforced
Enforcement of regulations is monitored
Other
(please
specify)
14. c. Please complete this table at project closure for each sector that is a primary or a secondary focus of the project.
Please answer YES or NO to each statement under the sectors that are a focus of the project.
Sector
Oil and Gas
Statement:
Biodiversity considerations are mentioned in sector policy
Biodiversity considerations are mentioned in sector policy through
specific legislation
Regulations are in place to implement the legislation
The regulations are under implementation
The implementation of regulations is enforced
Enforcement of regulations is monitored
169
Agriculture
Fisheries
Forestry
Other
(please
specify)
All projects please complete this question at the project mid-term evaluation and at the
final evaluation, if relevant:
14.d. Within the scope and objectives of the project, has the private sector
undertaken voluntary measures to incorporate biodiversity considerations in
production? If yes, please provide brief explanation and specifically mention the
sectors involved.
An example of this could be a mining company minimizing the impacts on
biodiversity by using low-impact exploration techniques and by developing plans for
restoration of biodiversity after exploration as part of the site management plan.
[to be completed at mid-term]
VI. OTHER IMPACTS
16. Please briefly summarize other impacts that the project has had on mainstreaming
biodiversity that have not been recorded above.
[to be completed at mid-term and project end, when impacts will be measured]
170
United Nations Development Programme
Country: Nigeria
PROJECT DOCUMENT
[Signature Page to be completed after GEF Approval]
Project Title:
UNDAF Outcome(s):
UNDP Strategic Plan Environment and Sustainable Development Primary Outcome:
UNDP Strategic Plan Secondary Outcome:
Expected CP Outcome(s):
(Those linked to the project and extracted from the country programme document)
Expected CPAP Output (s)
Those that will result from the project and extracted from the CPAP)
Executing Entity/Implementing Partner:
Implementing Entity/Responsible Partners:
Brief Description
Programme Period:
Atlas Award ID:
Project ID:
PIMS #
Start date:
End Date
Management Arrangements
PAC Meeting Date
_____________
Total resources required ______________
Total allocated resources: ________________
•
Regular
________________
•
Other:
o
GEF ________________
o
Government
________________
o
In-kind
________________
o
Other
________________
______________
______________
______________
______________
______________
_____________
_____________
In-kind contributions
Agreed by (Government):
Date/Month/Year
Agreed by (Executing Entity/Implementing Partner):
Date/Month/Year
Agreed by (UNDP):
Date/Month/Year
171
________________